VOLUME 133 NUMBER 022 1st SESSION 35th PARLIAMENT

OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD)

Tuesday, February 15, 1994

Speaker: Gilbert Parent

HOUSE OF COMMONS

Tuesday, February 15, 1994

The House met at 10 a.m. Senate and House of Commons and of the legislative assembly of each province to which the amendment applies; ______NOW THEREFORE the House of Commons resolves that an amendment to the Constitution of be authorized to be made by proclamation issued by His Excellency the Governor General under the Great Seal of Canada in accordance with Prayers the schedule hereto. ______SCHEDULE AMENDMENT TO THE

1. The Schedule to the Prince Edward Island Terms of Union is amended by adding ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS thereto, after the portion that reads ‘‘And such other charges as may be incident to, and connected with, the services [Translation] which by the ‘‘British North America Act, 1867’’ appertain to the General Government, and as are or may be allowed to the other Provinces;’’ BUSINESS CORPORATIONS ACT the following: Hon. David Anderson (for the Minister of Industry) moved ‘‘That a fixed crossing joining the Island to the mainland may be substituted for the for leave to introduce Bill C–12, an act to amend the Canada steam service referred to in this Schedule; Business Corporations Act and to make consequential amend- That, for greater certainty, nothing in this Schedule prevents the imposition of tolls ments to other acts. for the use of such a fixed crossing between the Island and the mainland, or the private operation of such a crossing.’’ (Motions deemed adopted, bill read for the first time and Citation printed.) 2. This Amendment may be cited as the Constitution Amendment, 1993 (Prince Edward Island). * * * He said: Mr. Speaker, I am happy that you have read a fair [English] portion of the amendment which we intend to discuss today. The amendment is very specific with regard to the terms of reference QUESTIONS ON THE ORDER PAPER between Canada and Prince Edward Island. Mr. Peter Milliken (Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Mr. Speaker, I I apprise the new Speaker, who has just taken his place in the ask that all questions be allowed to stand. chair, that this is a very specific amendment. Therefore I would hope that comments all hon. members make have some rele- The Speaker: Shall all questions stand? vance to the subject matter which we are dealing with and not Some hon. members: Agreed. the broad general topic of constitutional reform. One hundred and thirty years ago the Fathers of Confedera- ______tion gathered in Prince Edward Island and created the concept of Canada. Thanks to their genius Canada has flourished through- GOVERNMENT ORDERS out the 20th century. Today Prince Edward Island seeks a small but significant amendment to its terms of union with Canada. [English] This improvement will create the opportunity for our smallest province to take its rightful place in the 21st century. PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND FIXED LINK (1010 ) Hon. (Minister of Public Works and Gov- ernment Services and Minister for the Atlantic Canada On behalf of the I am honoured to Opportunities Agency) moved: place before the House of Commons a formal resolution to amend the terms of union between the Government of Canada WHEREAS section 43 of the Constitution Act, 1982 provides that an amendment to the Constitution of Canada may be made by proclamation issued by the Governor and Prince Edward Island which I am certain all members of this General under the Great Seal of Canada where so authorized by resolutions of the House will want to support in the deliberations to follow.

1343

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders The amendment, albeit short and straightforward, is impor- The agreement is an innovative, prudent and intelligent tant for Prince Edward Island, important for the entire Atlantic approach to the building of public infrastructure. The agreement region and important for Canada. breaks new ground in government–private sector partnerships. Investment of taxpayers’ dollars is limited but also protected. The proposed amendment provides the necessary constitu- tional framework for the replacement of the ferry service The people of Canada will not be responsible for footing the between Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick by a bridge bill for delays or cost overruns relating to this initiative. The across the Northumberland Strait. More significantly, the total contribution of the Government of Canada will consist of amendment provides a bridge for the future. 35 subsidy payments to the private sector development. The payments will be made annually at a cost of $42 million indexed The fixed crossing will allow Prince Edward Island to become to inflation. a full partner in Canada’s economy. The fixed crossing will spur Atlantic Canada’s economy in the short term and create real This formula effectively caps the cost and limits to 35 years hope for viable long term economic growth. the financial responsibilities of the Government of Canada to meet its constitutional obligation to the people of Prince Edward Construction of the 13 kilometre concrete bridge means new Island. skills, new technology, new jobs, new enthusiasm and new prospects for the future. By contrast, pursuing the option of the ferry service indefi- nitely would subject the taxpayer to undue and unexpected cost The amendment before Parliament today will allow a project without any reprieve in sight. As was made crystal clear by the to proceed which is fiscally sound and financially responsible, a Prime Minister both in our election red book and in the recent project which represents thoughtful public transportation speech from the throne, the government’s number one priority is policy, a project which sets new standards for environmental job creation. The fixed link and this particular initiative will do review, assessment and management. that. It will create jobs. The federal government is bound by the 1873 terms of union (1015) with Prince Edward Island to provide continuous communica- tions between the island and the mainland. Under the terms of the agreement, 96 per cent of bridge construction jobs will be filled by Atlantic . In total Since Confederation this obligation has been fulfilled by a over 3,500 jobs will be created in the three and a half year ferry service. The province of Prince Edward Island now wishes construction period. Further, at least 2,000 indirect jobs will be to strengthen, modernize and improve dramatically the means created as a result of spin–offs. That addresses clearly and by which the island is linked continuously with mainland unequivocally the government’s intent with regard to its priority Canada. of job creation. For that reason the federal government and the Government of The contracts also specify that 70 per cent of the total Prince Edward Island signed an agreement committing the two procurement requirements will be provided by Atlantic Cana- governments to make the necessary constitutional change to dians. Given the size and complexity of the undertaking, exten- permit the ferry service to be replaced by a bridge. sive spin–offs will offer Atlantic Canadians the chance to develop new construction, management and environmental The amendment before us today is the last in a series of protection skills. legislative steps required to enable Prince Edward Island to make that move forward. In the spring of 1993 Parliament What is most encouraging is that the economic benefits will debated and then passed Bill C–110, an act respecting the continue to flow long into the future. The tourism industry Northumberland Strait crossing. estimates that once the bridge is in operation, the number of people visiting P.E.I. will increase approximately 25 per cent. It I would be remiss in my opening remarks if I did not pay will open up new opportunities for even more employment in the tribute to those members of my own caucus who participated in vitally important hospitality industry of that province and other that debate and on previous occasion whereby the House deemed provinces as well. it appropriate to pass Bill C–110. The Prince Edward Island trucking industry will benefit to the I want to congratulate all members, some who are present, tune of some $10 million each year in time savings alone. Mr. some who are opposite, who participated in that debate. I wish to Speaker, you are very wise and very learned. I have no doubt you thank them sincerely. are probably a very well travelled individual. If you have taken or perhaps would like to take a trip in the immediate future to In June 1993 the Prince Edward Island legislature passed a Prince Edward Island, you would quickly understand why the resolution authorizing this amendment. In October an agree- trucking association is so much in favour of this initiative. It ment was signed by the federal government and Strait Crossing will decrease the time you will be parked at the ferry side Development Inc. to begin construction of a bridge linking waiting for the boat to transport you to the other side. Not only is Prince Edward Island to mainland Canada. it time saving but it is also an economic saving which will

1344

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders enhance opportunities and provide many spin–offs for that to do. I cannot stress too strongly that the overall effect of the sector of our economy. bridge will be many immediate and long–term benefits. The bridge will contribute to an increasingly dynamic economy for The bridge will provide much greater certainty and reliability those of us who reside in Atlantic Canada. In fact, the project of delivery for P.E.I.’s farmers and fishermen. There will be new constitutes a good deal, not only for the people of Prince possibilities of growth for the province’s processing and Edward Island, not only for the people of Atlantic Canada but, I manufacturing industries. dare to suggest in the House of Commons, for the people of Canada. P.E.I.’s businesses will be able to improve their bottom lines. An improved competitive position for the island’s economy In drawing up this agreement the public servants of my means an improved future for the young people of the island. I department have done a commendable job of ensuring that the am certain all members of the House regardless of political taxpayers are protected from any unexpected, unnecessary or ideology will want to support that enthusiastically. unwarranted costs. All of the risks have been assumed by the developer, including financing, design, construction, mainte- Not surprisingly, over the years since the idea of a fixed link nance and operation. was first advanced, support has grown to the point where today over 70 per cent of islanders are in favour of the bridge. I do not mean the people from Cape Breton Island, I mean the people I know some people, perhaps in this House, have expressed from Prince Edward Island. I wish to make that very clear. concerns that the ultimate owners of two of the development partners are not Canadian. But I am satisfied that this is The bridge is an exciting project for Prince Edward Island and essentially a Canadian undertaking whose benefits will largely Atlantic Canada. I know that some people still have concerns. I accrue to the people of this country. It is true that Northern want to do my best to address some of the concerns this morning Construction Company and the GTMI company are Canadian and perhaps respond to questions that hon. members might have. subsidiaries of foreign firms, but both subsidiaries have been operating actively in Canada for in excess of 30 years. I would like to take this opportunity to reaffirm the commit- ments enshrined in a tripartite agreement made with the prov- I wonder if those critics—and I do not suggest for a moment inces of New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and the that they are here on the floor of the House of Commons—wher- Government of Canada. ever they may be, would seriously suggest stopping as it would be rather ridiculous if we were to say to GM, Ford and Chrysler: The ferry workers who will lose their jobs in June 1997 as a ‘‘Because you operate a subsidiary in Canada, in , you result of the ferry closures will be treated fairly. They will have should not be allowed to operate because your parent company first choice of employment on bridge operation and mainte- is a foreign one’’. That would be intellectually dishonest. We are nance. A fair severance package will be negotiated on top of the in a globally competitive world. I know members opposite provisions of the workers’ current contract. We will work would want to agree with my conclusion that this is important closely with ferry employees to find retraining opportunities for for Atlantic Canadians and important for Canada as a whole. jobs in many sectors of the local economy which will benefit from the presence of the new bridge. Furthermore, this particular developer should be complim- ented for assembling world class technical expertise. The truth (1020) is that the proponent of the fixed link, Strait Crossing Develop- ment, is a 100 per cent Canadian owned company which happens Fishermen affected by the construction activities in specific to be headquartered in Calgary, . Who will benefit most areas of the Northumberland Strait will be compensated for lost from the project? The answer clearly is the citizens of Canada. opportunity. As part of this particular deal the developer has set aside a $10 million trust fund to be administered according to a plan developed mostly by fishermen themselves. The developer was required to have all the project costs in trust at the time of closing, plus a 10 per cent contingency until I also want to reaffirm the commitment to provide financial substantial completion of the bridge has taken place. The assistance through another agency which I happen to be respon- developer has posted a $200 million performance bond as well sible for, the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, for sound as a $35 million compliance bond and a $20 million labour and business initiatives in order to help the communities of Prince material bond. All these are supported by guarantees with the Edward Island and New Brunswick in the coming months and parent companies. The deal was struck in such a way that the years. We will take the appropriate measures to help the affected parent companies are providing the necessary financial backing individuals and communities because it is the fair and just thing to the developer.

1345

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders

(1025) The Acting Speaker (Mr. Kilger): Is it agreed?

I want to emphasize that the developer and not the Canadian Some hon. members: Agreed. taxpayers will be fully liable for cost overruns. If the project is not completed by May 31, 1997, the developer must pay the cost Mr. Dingwall: Mr. Speaker, I am also prepared if members of operating the ferry service until the bridge is ready. Once the deem it appropriate to bring in the six feet of studies which have bridge is in operation the developer must operate and maintain it been done. If members wish me to do that they might want to to the satisfaction of the federal government before having indicate it to me with a note and I would be prepared to do that so access to the revenues from the tolls. everyone will understand that there are no secrets, no backroom deals that have been consummated with regard to this project. The cost for crossing the bridge will be comparable to that of the current ferry service. Over the next 35 years these tolls will I want to say that the project was subjected to the most open not be increased in any year by more than three–quarters of the and fully transparent public consultation process which in- annual rate of inflation. Through these and other provisions the volved over 80 public meetings attended by over 10,000 individ- government has made every effort to ensure that taxpayers are uals. This is quite remarkable in itself. I believe this project sets properly protected before, during and after construction. the standard of environmental review and will become a model of environmental management for undertakings of similar size Similarly, I want to make an honest effort to answer all fair and similar scope. minded questions and reservations raised by Canadians about the fixed link. In that spirit I would like to comment on the (1030) question of the possible environmental effects of this project. There is no doubt and there should be no doubt in anyone’s This issue has been raised throughout the past five years, 60 mind that there are Canadians out there who under no circum- months. I know it has concerned a number of members of the stances whatsoever would agree to having a fixed link, whether House. I do not intend to detail all the environmental studies and because of the environment, personal bias, personal views, expert reviews that were undertaken except to say that there finances or otherwise. However, the vast majority of the people were in excess of 100 studies, most of them very comprehen- of Prince Edward Island who voted in a democratic referendum sive. passed in their legislature voted in favour of the fixed link. We as a national Parliament must recognize that fact, as I am sure hon. members opposite will want to recognize in their interven- I was going to seek the indulgence of the House and bring tions that will fall in line shortly. before it the six feet of studies that have been undertaken with regard to this project but I thought it would be rather cumber- In late August the Federal Court of Canada in response to a some to do so. It would be rather costly for the Government of challenge ruled that the Department of Public Works and Canada, particularly the House of Commons, to have reprinted Government Services had gone well beyond what would normal- in Hansard each and every word of all of those studies. ly have been expected in meeting the federal environmental review guideline order. I will quote from Justice Cullen’s ruling As you know, Mr. Speaker, from your study of the transcripts when he said: of this debate at another time, I placed before the House a number of studies. I refer to them not in totality but in summary The criteria accepted and followed by Public Works Canada when making its self–assessment was more than adequate for the purposes and complied with the fashion, bringing to the attention of the House just how impor- (environmental) guideline order. tant those studies were in answering a number of environmental concerns. However, I assure the House this does not mean the end of our environmental concerns. My department, as well as other re- Today I am tabling with the permission of the House a list of sponsible federal and provincial agencies, will continue to all of the studies which have been done, both in French and monitor environmental impacts during the construction period English. If members wish to refer to them I am certain my and beyond to ensure compliance with the agreement and to take department can make these studies readily available so they can action if it should be deemed necessary. examine them, study them at night, take them home on the weekend and review them, maybe get an independent study by The fixed link is a very exciting initiative, a very bold their particular political party or their particular group. Then we initiative. It is an undertaking of historic proportions. It is yet could hear back from them in the months and years ahead on another challenging opportunity to open up the country, to unite whether the studies, which number in total 100, were appropri- the country and to build it. ate. Yes, the 13–kilometre bridge, the longest ever over waters I wish to have the consent of the House to table these two which freeze, is ambitious but so were the St. Lawrence seaway, documents if members wish to refer to them at a later time. the Trans–Canada highway and the great Canadian railroad. The

1346

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders hallmark of all these endeavours was the determination to bring opportunity to become full partners in the Canadian economy Canadians one step closer together. and an opportunity for a better future.

This undertaking demonstrates that Canada has the ability to [Translation] develop an imaginative approach to government industry co–op- eration in carrying out a major public initiative: partnership at Hon. (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. its best. Speaker, we have here a situation that has its roots in the distant past. When Prince Edward Island entered Confederation in I should like to think that the Prince Edward Island bridge 1873, the island had set certain conditions which were agreed to project, in addition to its other merits, could serve as a global by the federal government and the other members of Confedera- model for future joint projects of this type. Closer public and tion at the time, conditions which concerned mainly establish- private sector collaboration is a major contemporary avenue ing and maintaining a communications link between the Island through which we can stimulate investment and create badly and the continent, so that Prince Edward Island could in some needed jobs. way be part of the Canadian community.

During the election campaign we heard from every political At the time, this link was provided by a steam service, which leader talking about a partnership between industry and govern- is how it was described in the terms of the union. Over the years, ment. There is no other better example than the fixed link the federal government has met the commitments made in the between Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick which Constitution, which today represent a subsidy of $28 million. demonstrates that point more accurately. That is, the original commitment today works out to $28 million in constant dollars. The Northumberland bridge is a very sound and a very important project. The present of Prince Edward Island, My point is that we are not starting from scratch. The province the Hon. Catherine Callbeck, said: is not asking the federal government to build a bridge starting A tremendous economic boost—that will provide a stable, economic climate for from zero funds. The government of P.E.I., from a normal desire business to survive in this province. to adjust to changing times, now asks that the link, formerly Jim Larkin of the Prince Edward Island Tourism Association provided by a steam service and subsequently by more modern remarked that it is ‘‘probably the key to the future of this ships, be made more effective and more continuous by building province’’. The premier of New Brunswick, the Hon. Frank a bridge. McKenna, said: My point is, and this may surprise my hon. friend the minister, I am absolutely confident that history will favourably judge the fixed crossing to who was furiously defending the government’s position against Prince Edward Island—it’s time to seize the moment and opt for progress in Atlantic Canada. the opposition he anticipated from the Bloc Quebecois, my point is that the Bloc Quebecois takes a very positive view of this Clearly the vast majority of the people of Prince Edward project, and it is too bad the minister wasted precious ministeri- Island sees this bridge as an important initiative which will give al time and energy which would have been better spent on other the people of the province renewed opportunity to participate in issues, since after due consideration, the Bloc Quebecois, feels the country’s economy, renewed opportunity to enhance their the economics are sound, the financial structures make sense own lives and the lives of their families. The bridge is creating a and there is an element of fairness added to the Canadian renewed sense of optimism for Prince Edward Island and for the federation as it exists today. Atlantic region. A strong Atlantic economy is a vital part of a strong Canadian economy. If we look at the economics, it is clear a bridge will increase economic activity on the Island, that tourism will increase, and (1035) by the way, I did not wait for the minister’s cordial invitation to visit Prince Edward Island. I already visited the island as a Atlantic Canadians know within their hearts and minds that minister at the time, and as a tourist last year. It is a magnificent the bridge is only one part of the solution, but as Sir Winston island, and I know tourism will improve considerably once there Churchill once said: ‘‘The chain of destiny can only be grasped is a bridge that provides for easy access at all times. We agree one link at a time’’. that on the economic side, there is a considerable advantage for the government and the people of Prince Edward Island. In conclusion I urge members of Parliament from all political parties and those who are independents to support the amend- The financial structure is something which the government ment before us today. I urge members of the House to create the should monitor very closely. It is true that the financing scheme opportunity for Canada’s smallest province, Prince Edward is quite ingenious. There is no undue burden on the federal Island, and the rest of Atlantic Canada to become economically government since the subsidy, which it has to pay at any rate and stronger. I urge members of the House to give a new generation will keep on paying, and which is now $28 million, will upon of Canadians who happen to reside in Prince Edward Island an completion, in 1997, be $41.9 million in constant dollars. There

1347

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders will of course be adjustments for inflation, but there would be in seen. Perhaps it would be good to know what measures are being any case. planned.

Consideration must also be given to what will happen after (1040) construction is completed and the bridge is in operation. We know that fisheries, particularly the lobster fishery, will be As of 1997 we are looking at an annual increase of roughly affected and that some form of compensation is planned. I think $14 million which the federal government will have to continue that during the coming debate, the government should tell us a awarding to Prince Edward Island and, given the expected little more about its plans to provide compensation. benefits, I do not think it is an exaggerated amount. [English] We applaud this private sector initiative involving the I will say it in English for our friends in P.E.I. We think this is construction and the operation of the bridge. A word of caution an equitable measure of progress which should promote the is in order, however. I think that all parliamentarians should economic development of this province of Canada. That is why demand that the government be extremely attentive and monitor we will support it. construction activities closely. [Translation] I realize that construction will be carried out by a private firm, but it is essential that the government monitor the work closely. I would also like to draw the government’s attention to a What happens if the project goes over budget? This is the point problem with the drafting of the constitutional amendment that raises the most concerns. Costs might start to get out of before the House. The problem seems to be one of agreement hand. After all, we are talking about a major undertaking, the between the French and the English versions. construction of a 13 kilometre long bridge across a strait in which a great deal of ice forms during the winter. There will be a This could, in my opinion, cause some major legal problems substantial amount of pressure on the bridge footings. What since as we know, following the 1982 amendments, pursuant to happens if there are cost overruns? section 56, I believe, of the current Constitution, both the English and French versions are equally authoritative.

The documents that we have in our possession do not show The same cannot be said for the Constitution of 1982. Despite what the government’s responsibility would be if such an event the commitments made in 1982, we are still awaiting the were to occur. Legally, I believe the government’s responsibility official, authoritative French version of the Canadian Constitu- is limited to guaranteeing annual payments. However, what tion. In passing, I have one small question. How is it that a would happen if during construction, the private sector compa- country like Canada, which claims to be bilingual, still does not nies fell on hard times, financially speaking? have an official French version of the Constitution? We will get back to that some other day. We all know what happened with the Channel. Of course the two projects are vastly different in terms of sheer scope, but the The fact remains, however, that this amendment which will be fact remains that constructing a 13–kilometre long bridge adopted today will be equally authoritative in both languages capable of withstanding extremely harsh weather conditions is a since the new constitutional system is in place. Looking at the sizeable undertaking. Has the government considered what it resolution, we see that the English version reads as follows: will do if the project goes over budget? It should shed some light on this point and tell us what steps it intends to take to ensure (1045) that there are no cost overruns. [English] Regarding the environment, I am not as familiar with this ‘‘That a fixed crossing joining the island to the mainland may aspect of the issue as the minister, who clearly has up to date be substituted for the steam service referred to in this sched- information. Opposition members do not have access to files as ule’’. May be substituted. In the French version we read: readily as ministers. However, when I was Environment Minis- ter, I had sought assurances that a very stringent environmental Qu’un ouvrage de franchissement reliant l’île et le continent remplace le service study would be done. I believe that such a study was carried out de bateaux. . . and that the minister is correct in saying that the most extensive [Translation] precautions have been taken. While in English you have something that may or may not The government should, however, exercise caution during the happen—the government has the power, the option of replacing actual construction phase because certain operations will affect the old steam service by a fixed crossing—in French, the the environment. The minister has said that he will be taking government has to do it. There are very significant nuances. I am certain measures, but exactly which ones, that remains to be somewhat surprised that the government’s legal services failed

1348

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders to pick up such a significant nuance, one that could certainly, in saying that the Constitution should be reopened in this case. under certain circumstances, cause major legal problems. We think that, if the government can accommodate this econom- ic need in the case of Prince Edward Island, it should also fill I do not know whether the government intended to be as this more urgent, political, social, even ethical need to take formally committed as in the French clause or to have a way out steps that will, in the long run, solve the native problem. like in the English one. I do not know what they intend to do. Perhaps they should tell us which reflects their true intentions We cannot go on like this, as we are experiencing numerous and make sure both versions reflect the same legal reality. repercussions in every respect. First of all, from a social standpoint, the sad picture of what is happening in some reserves, the extreme hardships suffered by the people should be I would like to add that, if this is good for Prince Edward enough to convince us that we need well thought out instead of Island—and it is—and if the federal government is able to make piecemeal solutions and that the demand for native self–govern- financial commitments that I would describe as reasonable to ment in a framework and under conditions that are appropriate ensure substantial economic development in Prince Edward should be submitted to the government, which should respond Island for the 125,000 residents of the island, one can wonder with the same realism it is showing today in recognition of the why the federal government no longer conducts this kind of need to establish a fixed link between Prince Edward Island and projects which in the past have prompted massively enthusiastic the mainland. responses in terms of economic development. I am thinking of the HST, the high speed train, in particular. (1050)

If the government saw fit—and rightly so—in the interest of I would like to conclude by appropriating an argument in- 125,000 people to get involved in this major project which we voked by the minister. The minister, perhaps thinking that the support, it would seem to me that, for the 16 million people of Bloc Quebecois would oppose this measure, urged us not to raise and Ontario, in the interest of connecting the economic objections and to respect the will expressed by the people of heartland of Canada to the United States, the largest economic Prince Edward Island in a democratic referendum. He made a market place all of us have access to, it may be worthwhile to pressing, emotional appeal to respect public opinion as ex- look into putting into place a link, another type of link, a railway pressed in a democratic referendum. link, taking advantage of the very high technology offered by the HST as part of the same project. We are in total agreement with the minister today and we will ask him to stand by his words in due course, if and when Quebec I will not elaborate on this, as some of my colleagues will makes the decision we are hoping it will make. address this specific issue, but I do urge the government to go further in the direction it is taking today and to ensure that [English] reasonable, practical and forward–looking major projects are initiated. Mr. (Calgary West): Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to this constitutional resolution under section 43 Finally, I cannot help but notice that, in response to an of the Constitution Act, 1982 to amend the Prince Edward Island obvious need, the government has decided to reopen the Consti- terms of union in the schedule, sections 1 and 2. The purpose of tution. We know that the Prime Minister and his government are the resolution is of course as stated, to allow the substitution of a claiming left and right that they do not intend to talk about the bridge for a ferry. Constitution: ‘‘We will not touch the Constitution. I have absolutely no desire to touch the Constitution’’. It has become a This particular resolution comes from a government com- taboo subject, except when there is a need to address this issue. mitted to not open the Constitution, to not even remotely discuss constitutional questions. At least that is the position as we have understood it. But is it really its position to act that way? There is such a need today and the government, in a practical and realistic fashion, has decided to do what must be done. It is Already this is the second constitutional amendment being no sin to touch the Constitution when it must be done. And, as it passed since the defeat of the Charlottetown accord. It is in must be done, we are supporting today’s motion. addition to a number of extra constitutional measures that are either being taken or being considered, such as aboriginal I know that, as far as the Bloc Quebecois’s designs for Quebec self–government or federal–provincial division of powers and are concerned, it is not a matter of reopening the Constitution to overlap and duplication. achieve Quebec’s sovereignty; such a decision will be made democratically in due course by Quebecers themselves. As for Therefore the position that we are not going to talk about or the current, very serious debate on native self–government and amend the Constitution or deal with constitutional questions the extremely pressing and critical issues being raised, I think seems increasingly to be restricted to one particular issue, which that the leader of Canada’s First Nations, Mr. Mercredi, is right is the Senate. When it comes to the Senate we will not discuss

1349

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders the Constitution directly, indirectly or even hint at it, but There were also other important functions the Senate of everything else appears to be on the table. Canada was designed to fulfil. It would be a chamber of sober second thought. In other words it would fulfil the function of Since we are talking about the Constitution today, I will use checks and balances seen in many constitutional arrangements, this opportunity to discuss some of our concerns on the Consti- not just in Canada but in other countries. Sober second thought tution. I am sure some of my colleagues will do the same. I want was the term used. As I pointed out to some audiences the use of specifically to discuss our position on the Senate and on some of the term sober was probably not entirely accidental during the the reforms that could be made to the Senate, particularly time of our founding prime minister. outside of the constitutional context. In that regard the Senate had important characteristics that Of course, the House is well aware that our party supports a reflected that function. Generally speaking it could not originate triple–E Senate. We believe the Senate should be elected, it bills, certainly not money bills; they came and still do come should be fully effective, it should have full veto powers over from this Chamber. As a chamber of sober second thought the legislation, and it should be equal. It should have equal repre- appointments were lifetime. People were selected. A very sentation from every province. different kind of person was expected to sit in the Senate from those sitting in the Commons. We find that under section 29 of This particular amendment attempts to update the Constitu- the Constitution Act, 1867. tion, to recognize that things are different today from what they may have been in 1873. To substitute a bridge for a ferry seems A third function of our Senate originated in recent history in reasonable. Why not then recognize that certain political and the United States. That is the protection of the partners in the institutional realities are very different today from what they federation and their role in the federation. were in 1867? Certainly the Constitution of 1867 did not establish an equal To recall our constitutional history, in 1867 the Fathers of Senate. I concede that. However it also certainly did not, Confederation established a parliamentary system consistent explicitly did not, establish a Senate based on representation by with the political theory of their time. That was the political population. It established a Senate where there would be three theory dominant in the 18th and 19th centuries, a very different regions or what are called divisions under section 22. At the kind of theory from what we have today. They established a time that was a very good reflection of the regional balance of Parliament that would have three parts: , and in power within the country. The provinces of Ontario and Quebec particular two effective legislative chambers, the Senate and the which had been recreated by Confederation were constituted as House of Commons. regions and the two maritime provinces together were consti- tuted as a region. This model was common and still is common in most of the world, particularly the anglo–American world. The United Consistent with the theory that the Senate was not elected, Kingdom has the House of Lords and the House of Commons. unlike the United States the members were not appointed by The United States has the Senate and the House of Representa- provincial governments but were appointed by the cabinet, the tives. Even in our own provinces at that time we generally had executive. The cabinet or executive in that era was expected to two legislative chambers. We had the legislative councils and be much more diverse in a partisan sense than we see today, the legislative assemblies. In all provinces the upper house has much more diverse in a regional sense, and much more diverse now disappeared, although traces of it remain in Prince Edward in the sense of personality and importance of the various senior Island. ministers.

(1055) The original Senate was selected by a government in which party lines were not as clear as they are today. The government An effective upper house in 1867 was one that was not itself was constituted of people of different political persuasions elected. That is very different from the view we have today, a and the Senate was picked in much the same way. That practice very different theory of representation, a very different theory of has of course changed a great deal. government. I will not get into that at great length. The Senate was intended to be and was a highly effective body Suffice it to say that an upper house had several features in in political terms. It had full legislative powers which remain in Canada and elsewhere. In particular the principal historic func- the Constitution Act today. It had real power in cabinet and in tion of an upper house had been to represent the propertied the legislative process. Five out of 13 or 30 per cent of the classes. Under section 23 of the Constitution Act, 1867 there original cabinet ministers were senators. Today it is one out of were important and the very high property qualifications for the 30. It would shock many Canadians to learn today that two of our time of $4,000 for membership in the Senate. prime ministers came from the Senate. They held their prime

1350

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders ministership in the Senate rather than in the Commons. Of However, those houses built on the concept of regional course in Britain it was quite common at that time for a lord to representation within a federation have remained and by and be prime minister as well as a member of the Commons. large flourished as legislative chambers. The Senates in the United States and Australia have become elected bodies and (1100 ) have become very powerful. In the case of the Senate in the United States we know what Diversity and important political figures were present in the happened there. The United States Senate was not originally Senate at that time, right from the beginning. The principal elected but rather chosen by state legislatures. That manner of Liberal leader of the day, George Brown, was appointed to the selection was gradually broadened and eventually some states Senate after he failed to secure representation in the election of began to have popular elections for their senators even before 1867. the constitutional amendment proclaiming such a thing had come to pass. The Senate was largely elected by the time that Things have changed. Today we have a fuller and more happened. democratic theory of government than we did in the past and effectiveness of the Senate, as with any other political body, In Canada the Senate has survived but its modernization has requires that it be elected. This is not just a phenomenon of the been slow. We have attempted to move along with the develop- Senate. I would point out that the House of Commons, as ment of the theories but at a very slow pace. We have made no constituted in 1867, would not be remotely considered demo- attempts in our history to increase the property requirement that cratic today. We will talk on another occasion whether this defined the early Senate. It still exists on paper but $4,000 real House of Commons is effective and truly democratic. I will property is now a modest requirement for many people. leave that to a later date. In 1915 we moved to recognize the west. After the west had In 1867 members of the House of Commons were elected but been in Confederation for about 45 years we decided it was time only by property holders, only by those over 21 years of age, to formally recognize the presence of the west in the regional only by those who were male. In some provinces of Canada, in chamber. Before that there had been a few senators appointed some parts of Canada and at certain times in our history, from various provinces now and again. In 1915 a fourth Senate elections were restricted by racial considerations. division was created to recognize western Canada. Since then other representatives have been added in Newfoundland and in We would never for a minute suggest that would be an the territories. appropriate way of choosing the House of Commons today or an appropriate composition for the House of Commons and so we (1105) have modernized it. We have modernized the House of Com- mons but not the Senate. Why have we done that? I will put it in In 1965 we took the step of ending lifetime Senate appoint- very simple and blunt terms. We have modernized the House of ments. We know there are very few lifers but this has been one Commons because it is the power centre of Ontario and Quebec. particular reform. We have not modernized the Senate because it was intended to be the voice for the other regions that have not fared as well in In 1989–90 we had the election of the first senator, the late Confederation. Senator Stan Waters, a member of my party, a good personal friend of mine and a ground breaker, as we all had hoped. Just as in the United States, when Senator Waters was elected there At the centre of this argument I would only point out to my were denials from those who opposed Senate election and constituents and to those who are watching today the Ontario regional representation, denials that this could happen, that it and Quebec alliance that will shove through this particular could not happen, that it was unconstitutional, that it was illegal. constitutional amendment. There were a million impediments.

It is interesting to see in this century what has happened to It is amazing how things can happen in this country, in any upper houses, not just in the anglo–American world but across country, in any political system when people want them to the world. Those houses that were built mainly or almost happen. It is amazing how many excuses and roadblocks can be exclusively on pre–democratic theory have atrophied or disap- created when there is a desire to thwart the principle underlying peared. I think, for example, of the House of Lords in Britain the action. which still exists today but which has largely been stripped of its powers and exists, I suggest, as a relic of another era. Today the minister, to my surprise, spoke about praising the P.E.I. bridge because it had been approved in a referendum. How In the case of our provinces, the legislative councils, the many times since this House has reconvened have we heard the upper houses of the provinces, which really had an exclusive government speak against referendums and the danger pres- pre–democratic function, have entirely disappeared, the last ented in referendums? When the government has an agenda it being in Quebec in 1968. wants to see go through, a referendum is possible.

1351

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders

In conclusion, I will certainly not be supporting this hypocrit- (1110 ) ical amendment. I suspect that many of my party members feel the same way. I will not support a selective updating of our We are committed to taking every step within our power to federation. I will not support a mentality that says some needs support job creation, stimulate economic activity and restore are to be addressed while other needs are to be laughed at or hope and confidence in the future for all Canadians. ignored, depending on crass political needs. Nowhere is this more the case than in Atlantic Canada which has more than any other area of the country suffered too long Senate reform is important. It is a federalist solution to the from high levels of unemployment and despair. kinds of regional problems that plague this country and I would suggest that in my region problems exist that are much more The House is aware that the building of this new bridge to serious than some people here realize. Senate election, which I Prince Edward Island will provide a welcome boost to the entire have spoken on specifically, is a partial solution that does not Atlantic economy in terms of job opportunity and increased even require opening the Constitution in order to proceed. It business activity. only requires a basic sense of fairness. Without that sense of fairness do not expect the support of myself or my riding or the Even more significant will be the long term benefits to the taxpayers I represent. Do not expect to keep coming to the region and in particular to the province of Prince Edward Island. trough to ask for these kinds of favours when our concerns on The bridge project represents a long range investment in trans- these matters are not taken seriously. portation infrastructure which will almost certainly pay off in increased opportunity and in new business development for the [Translation] region. The lack of a fixed and reliable link with the rest of Canada Mr. Gagliano: I rise on a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I would has long restricted the commercial and industrial activity in like to inform the House that from now on, pursuant to Standing Prince Edward Island. Order 43(2), government members will split the 20–minute period provided for speeches into two 10–minute speeches, each Prince Edward Island premier Catherine Callbeck comment- followed by a 5–minute question and comment period. ing on the issue said recently: The entire course of P.E.I.’s history has revolved around its isolation from the The Acting Speaker (Mr. Kilger): I thank the government mainland. The announcement that the fixed crossing will proceed will whip. Resuming debate with the hon. Secretary of State for fundamentally alter the province’s relationship with the rest of Canada. In my opinion, that change will be for the better. Vet erans. The Northumberland Strait bridge project will have an im- [English] mediate significant impact on the economy of Atlantic Canada in general and in particular on Prince Edward Island. Building Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Secretary of State (Veterans)): the bridge will create hundreds of direct jobs for each of the four Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to stand and support the years of construction and numerous indirect jobs throughout constitutional amendment put forward by my hon. colleague Atlantic Canada. from Cape Breton—East Richmond. Under the terms of the contract between the federal govern- ment and the contractor over 90 per cent of the jobs will come This constitutional amendment will have a major effect in the from Atlantic Canada. province of Prince Edward Island. It will start to bring to an end a topic that has been discussed in the province for possibly over In an area with high unemployment and needing the jobs, over 100 years. 90 per cent of the jobs will come from our region. This will provide a tremendous boost for employment throughout the region and will provide thousands of workers with gainful This is a permanent link to the mainland. In the 1960s we even employment and an opportunity to practice and improve their started the bulldozers rolling and started the approaches to the job skills. This will give the tradespeople in Prince Edward fixed link or the causeway, as it was worded at that time. This Island an opportunity to improve their trade skills. resolution will clear one of the remaining hurdles to the North- umberland Strait bridge project. Direct employment on this project tells only part of the story. The contract also specifies that some 70 per cent of the total Government has made it clear during the election campaign procurement requirements will be obtained in the region. These and in the recent speech from the throne that putting Canadians requirements are massive. Thousands of tonnes of cement, back to work is the number one economic and social problem reinforcing steel, cable, fabricated metal and manufactured facing this country. The number one economic and social components are needed as well as many other service require- problem facing this country is jobs. ments.

1352

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders Given that the total project is in the area of $850 million the The most effective way to reduce the escalation of and the wages and procurement expenditures paid by the developer will need for social spending is to put people to work. That is exactly inject more than half a billion dollars into the local economy what the government plans to do; that is exactly what the project in the next four years, the economy of the Atlantic region, one will do. It will give workers in Atlantic Canada the opportunity of the most depressed areas in Canada. This should be a good for jobs and help them with their trade skills. It will be a major kick–start to the economy of Atlantic Canada, an economy that boost to the tourism industry in Prince Edward Island. It will certainly needs a boost. have a major effect on the Prince Edward Island transportation system because there will be no long waits at the ferries. The massive expenditure will also have a ripple effect into the retail and service sectors of Atlantic Canada and Prince Edward The four years and over half a billion dollars that will be Island, providing new opportunities for expansion and job injected into the economy are badly needed, along with the link creation in those areas as well. we have talked about in the province of Prince Edward Island for over 100 years. Given the positive impact this project will have, it is not surprising that the majority of islanders support this project. [Translation] One sector that will experience a significant boost will be the tourism industry in the province of Prince Edward Island. Mr. Ghislain Lebel (Chambly): Mr. Speaker, earlier my leader described to this House the position of our party concern- (1115) ing this link. In short, the hon. member from Lac–Saint–Jean said he understood the economic requirements the government party is faced with. He also noted that the concerned minister The tourism industry is absolutely essential to the economic recognized he was bound by the referendum, where the will of health of Prince Edward Island. It represents a larger share of the people was made known. that province’s gross domestic product than any other province in Canada. With regard to the link we are talking about today, this 13–kilometre bridge which is going to link Prince Edward Island The effects of the permanent link on tourism have been to the mainland, everyone in this House, and especially the carefully studied. It has been concluded that it would result in an government party, maintains that this project should contribute increase of visitors from the first year of operation. Some to job creation and economic recovery, and we agree with that. figures indicate about 25 per cent. It will certainly draw tourists However I would like to ask the previous speaker, in the absence to look at this major construction project, this megaproject, of his minister, if there will be an unofficial guideline prevent- while it is being built. It will also draw many tourists to Prince ing Quebecers and Canadians from Central Canada, that is Edward Island and through Atlantic Canada after it is built. It Ontario and Quebec, from working on this project, something will truly be something to see. similar to the official policy concerning the Hibernia project, in Newfoundland. We know that Quebecers are systematically An increase in tourists will have a tremendous and positive excluded from this project. On behalf of Quebecers in particular effect on the Prince Edward Island service industry such as and Canadians in general, I would like some further information accommodations, restaurants, entertainment, recreation, local on this issue. Will workforce mobility be hampered by some crafts, manufacturing, and all other sectors of retail trade. It will provision, legal or otherwise, concerning this project? encourage new investment in the Prince Edward Island hospital- ity infrastructure. (1120) Tourism is by no means the only industry that will benefit from this link. The availability of a reliable, faster and ultimate- [English] ly less costly link with the mainland will certainly make Prince Edward Island agriculture and fisheries industries more compet- Mr. MacAulay: Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for itive and should help them broaden their markets. While the his question. I am sure the minister is quite capable of speaking direct benefits may occur to the Atlantic region, it is true that the for himself. I am also sure that no project would be handled by project represents a good deal for all of Atlantic Canada and all public works that would indicate no one in Quebec or anywhere of Canada. else would get a job.

The economic recovery that our government is working for I have indicated that we come from an area of high unemploy- must embrace all regions of the country if it is to be successful. ment, probably the highest in the country. We need jobs and this By giving Atlantic Canadians a chance to go to work, to project provides jobs in our own area. The point is that we have strengthen their transportation infrastructure and to create long– the work force and we have the project. We would never exclude term economic opportunities we make the country stronger. anybody. The jobs are in the area and the project is there.

1353

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders I thank the hon. member’s leader for his support for the Shediac, Cap–Pelé, Port Elgin and Cape Tormentine. Conse- project. When he comes to vacation in the province of Prince quently, people using this bridge will drive through our area. Edward Island he will find it much easier to get there in a number of years. He would be very welcome to go there to work (1125) on it or to go there to visit us.

As the minister said, this is a major project the likes of which Mrs. Dianne Brushett (Cumberland—Colchester): Mr. we have never seen in our region before. It is said to be an $840 Speaker, I congratulate the minister today for bringing this million initiative, over a period of three or four years. resolution to the floor of the House. It is a giant step forward for Prince Edward Island, for Atlantic Canada, and for all Canada. It takes Atlantic Canada into the 21st century. I am very proud to This project will of course create employment, probably 900 be part of the government that is bringing this resolution to 1,000 jobs per year, for a few years. Mr. Speaker, I can tell you forward today. that my constituents are happy to see this project being ap- proved, for the simple reason that, given the current situation in the province and in fact in all of Atlantic Canada, where the My riding of Cumberland—Colchester takes in the northern fishing industry is collapsing, especially as regards groundfish, part of and abuts the Prince Edward Island North- any effort to stimulate employment is welcome and supported. umberland Strait. I would like to ask a question of the hon. People are particularly pleased because we are told, and in fact member who has just spoken. The current ferry that joins Prince we know, that 96 per cent of workers will be from Atlantic Edward Island with Nova Scotia at Caribou and Wood Islands Canada, which is not to say that workers from other regions will has been a means of transportation for our tourist industry from be excluded. You realize of course that people from our region Nova Scotia for some time. I am wondering what effect there will do their utmost to be hired for that project. will be when this bridge is connected from Prince Edward Island to New Brunswick. We are also told that 70 per cent of supplies will be provided by contractors from Atlantic Canada. For that purpose, the Mr. MacAulay: Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague from economic commission for south eastern New Brunswick has Cumberland—Colchester for raising an important point that hired one person, with the support of ACOA, the Atlantic certainly was an issue for me all during discussions on the fixed Canada Opportunities Agency, who will be responsible for link. I mentioned that we would have approximately a 25 per providing local contractors with all the necessary information to cent increase in tourism. That means more traffic. Without a offer their services. doubt we will have both the major infrastructure and the fixed link. We will also have the vitally important Wood Islands–Cari- I followed the development of this project because the bou ferry service. construction of such a bridge has been the subject of discussions for many years. In fact, an overpass as well as an access road I am very pleased that section 14 indicates that Canada were even built at the end of the fifties when there were already acknowledges the distinct and important role the Wood Islands– talks of building a fixed link between PEI and New Brunswick. Caribou ferry service provides and recognizes that the construc- Indeed, such an initiative has been discussed for a long time, to tion and operation of the fixed link crossing in no way diminish the point that people in our community were wondering if this the importance of this ferry service which is a vital link between was only a dream. It now seems that the dream will finally come Prince Edward Island and Nova Scotia. true, and we certainly hope so.

[Translation] This project may have been in the offing for a long time, but it was also developed very cautiously. A series of public meetings were held to inform Atlantic Canada residents on the building Hon. (Secretary of State (Parliamen- techniques and to reassure those who had concerns about the tary Affairs)): Mr. Speaker, it is with great interest and pleasure environment. And I can tell you that a lot of people and groups that I rise to support the proposed constitutional amendment did raise concerns about the environment. I want to say that my which will allow for the construction of a fixed crossing, that is constituents and myself are also very concerned by this aspect. a bridge joining Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick. I do share that concern but, at the same time, I am confident, We can understand that this project is of particular interest to considering what I heard and all the studies which were done. the residents of Beauséjour, since one end of the bridge will be The minister was not exaggerating when he said that all those in their riding, more specifically in Cape Tourmentine. To have studies could make a pile six feet high. Indeed, a lot of studies access to the bridge, people travelling from Nova Scotia will were done and those are public documents to which everyone drive through Port Elgin to reach Cape Tormentine, whereas can have access. So I am certain that all precautions have been those coming from New Brunswick will go through Moncton, taken to ensure that the environment will be protected.

1354

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders

(1130) with Marine Atlantic. It has started discussions with the unions to try to put a program in place to minimize those effects. I also know that all work on the construction sites, on the New Brunswick side or on the Prince Edward Island side, will be (1135) governed by strict procedures, both on land and on the waters of Northumberland Strait. I certainly offer my assistance in any way to make sure that the jobs available once the bridge opens are offered to those ferry workers and to make sure that those unable to get a job The workers will have to follow strict procedures supervised receive a proper compensation package. by a committee responsible for ensuring that all environmental precautions are taken. It is rather reassuring that the contractor [Translation] and all subcontractors must control their procedures and respect the environment. In conclusion I support this project. I support it because it will create jobs and give new impetus to the tourism industry. Of Of course, even if we take every precaution, some groups course, my colleague from Prince Edward Island just said that might be affected, and I am thinking particularly of fishermen Prince Edward Island’s tourism industry will develop as a result. here. In order to give these groups some protection, especially I am pleased about that, but we in Beauséjour, by offering fishermen, including those who fish for scallops and lobsters, tourism facilities like the land of la Sagouine, which you know who will be most affected, a committee has been set up to well, Arboiteau Park, which is now being developed, and other implement a compensation program. From the very beginning, projects under consideration, will try to attract visitors either on that is what we have demanded, citizens, fishermen and local their way to the island or on their way back. We will invite them associations alike: that a compensation program be set up before to spend a few hours or a few days with us. work begins so that those people would be compensated for their [English] losses if the fishery were damaged. Mrs. Dianne Brushett (Cumberland—Colchester): Mr. Although the final mechanism has not yet been determined, a Speaker, I concur with the hon. member that we have given great committee of fishermen, fishermen’s association representa- consideration to minimizing the environmental effects and the tives and officials is studying this problem. disruption to our fisheries, to guarantee as much as possible that this project is of worthy consideration and is first class for this day and age. When I spoke of lobster fishermen, the people of Cape Tormentine will be the most affected first because a way will Having said that, when talking about retraining or providing have to be cleared across the strait where construction will go on job security for those who will be displaced, it has been brought and the fishermen of other communities away from Cape to my attention during economic development discussions with Tormentine, like Murray Corner, Aboiteau, Cap–Pelé, Shediac municipalities in my riding that perhaps we could take our and up the Northumberland Strait to Cocagne, Buctouche and training programs to the job site. As these men and women are even as far as our area could feel the effects from the construc- working on the new project they would be given the opportunity tion. I do not think that these effects will be considerable, at for upgrading in literacy and computer skills, those kinds of least I hope not, but if they were affected, we will certainly have things that take them to the next job. Has the member given any a mechanism in place to compensate them. consideration to this in manpower training programs?

I spoke only of lobster fishermen, but there are also scallop [Translation] fishermen, since scallop banks will be affected by this bridge construction. Mr. Robichaud: Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her comments and question. Let me assure her that we will make [English] every effort to ensure that all governmental programs, those of the local associations as well as those of the government itself, will be made available to the workers in order to encourage them There is a group that will be directly affected by the construc- and help them find a job both during the construction stage of tion of this bridge. That group is the families of the ferry the project and once the bridge is finished, through the opportu- workers who will lose their jobs after construction of the bridge nities that will be generated. Every effort will be made to ensure is completed. Right now there are over 400 workers and the that this project brings about the maximum benefits possible. bridge will provide about 60 or 70 jobs. I want to reassure those people and members of the House that every effort will be made Mr. Osvaldo Nunez (Bourassa): Mr. Speaker, I agree with to offer to those people directly affected a proper compensation the amendment to the Constitution and the building of that and training package in order to minimize the effects of the loss bridge. I think it will promote tourism considerably. I have had of jobs when the bridge opens. I have been in communication the opportunity to visit Prince Edward Island; it is one of the

1355

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders most beautiful islands in the world, and I have seen a good many He may have forgotten, or perhaps he never listened to the countries. Official Opposition when we pledged to Canadians that equity and fairness in distribution would be the yardsticks by which we (1140) would measure proposals submitted to this House. The minister might have forgotten that, unless he just never was aware of it. But I question the job creation aspect of that project. In the Let us give him the benefit of the doubt, but let it be a lesson for medium term, it will certainly create jobs, but in the long term, him in the future. The minister should never again presume to there will job losses considering that each year some 400 think for the Official Opposition, especially given the fact that persons work on the ferry and in five years those 400 jobs will be he seems to have enough trouble trying to understand the issues reduced to about 50. Did he study that aspect of the issue? What he is presenting to this House. He does not have all the answers, alternative does he propose? Did he consult the unions? he has to do more work on these issues, and he should get on with it. The opposition will do its job, and the minister should do his. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Kilger): I know the Secretary of State for Parliamentary Affairs has found the 10–minute period too short. I simply want to remind him that the question and (1145) comments period is still shorter. Therefore we would appreciate a brief comment. I must say I was pleasantly surprised when I heard our friends Mr. Robichaud: Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the members opposite say they have the greatest respect for the results of a from the other side for supporting this amendment and also for referendum held in Prince Edward Island that revealed that the supporting the project as a whole. citizens of this province were very interested in the project, were very much in favour of it and considered it a major step Unfortunately, as the member mentioned, some of those now forward. I think respect for the will of the people as expressed in working for the ferry system, maybe I should say many of them, a referendum is very important, and I would remind our hon. will not find a job on the bridge. friends opposite that this should apply to all referendums that may be held in this country and that may have important As I mentioned during my speech, Marine Atlantic, the consequences for the future of its communities. company which operates the ferry system, has already contacted the unions in order to find ways to minimize the impact of the bridge opening and help those people find other jobs. My own major concern is for the environment. I understand the reasons for the project, and I support it, and I understand Of course, local communities and economic commissions are what it means to the people of Prince Edward Island, but I have trying to develop tourism and that could create jobs for the ferry some very real reservations, especially in connection with the workers of today. But I can assure you that every effort will be issue of ice formation. I am not an expert, but I am told that a made to help these people adapt to the new situation so that they major accumulation of ice near the bridge at certain times of the can find other jobs. year might alter the ecology of the area and possibly have a major impact on the fisheries. I believe the government has Mr. (Roberval): Mr. Speaker, even though recognized this by providing, if I am not mistaken, a $10 million we basically agree with the government, our comments in this relief plan to help fishermen who work in the area make the House prove that its approach differs vastly from the one transition to other work. This means the government is aware of members on this side would use. a significant impact on the fisheries.

Regardless of whether we support this project or not, we are concerned by its potential impact on the environment. It seems I am one of those who are very concerned about this kind of to me, at first glance anyway, that the government is not very situation, and I would have liked to see the environmental issues well equipped at this point to answer the many questions and researched more thoroughly. I am concerned. I know that one solve the numerous problems which might arise from the project case has already been brought before the courts. A number of in front of us. rulings have been handed down, and the court has had a second chance to rule on the quality of the environmental studies. But I First of all, I must say that after listening this morning to the must say that a project of this scope, which may have a very minister, I was rather shocked to hear that he had assumed, even significant impact—and one does not have to be an environmen- before being aware of our position on the matter, that the tal expert to understand this—it seems to me that the whole Official Opposition would oppose this project, at least, that is environmental question should have been researched more the impression he gave in his argument. It is rather odd. I wonder carefully in order to get more answers and more clarification. I how he came to the conclusion, even before we had a chance to still have a number of questions about this project. There are express our views on the topic, even before the beginning of this definitely negative sides that will affect the future of a number debate, that we would oppose this project. of fishermen. There may be a negative impact on climate and

1356

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders perhaps on certain social aspects as well, as a result of these Mr. Gauthier (Roberval): Mr. Speaker, I am willing not to major changes. mention the absence of the member but I would like to know if someone opposite can answer the questions that we are asking. In any case, I think that instead of hurrying things along, the government should dig a little deeper and be in a position to give If the issue is worth debating, it would be important to have a us better assurances that these issues have been given the valid speaker to respond to these concerns. Let me remind you attention they deserve. If there are any problems with this that the role of Parliament is really to allow members of bridge, it will not be the people from Ontario or Ottawa, or Parliament to express opinions on projects. Montreal or Vancouver who are affected, but local people, in an area that is economically fragile and has a low population I think that the motion before us today is aimed at seeking the density. Yes, a megaproject in this sector may have some very co–operation of the opposition parties. A number of speeches positive effects if the project is a good one, but it might also that were made until now are asking for that support. That have a negative impact if we do not bother to look at all sides of support is being given, but—and this is important—the people the problem because we are in too much of a hurry to get this on responsible should at least try and respond to our concerns. the road. I agree not to mention the absence or presence of a member, (1150) but I certainly wish, and I know I am complying with the Standing Orders, that someone could give us an answer and listen to us in order to be able to give details and explanations on As for the environmental issues, I think they were disposed of this matter. a bit quickly. I have a feeling that we tried to meet this deadline by putting some pressure on the stakeholders. For the time being, what I want to do is register my concern in this respect. Therefore, I will go back to the financing issue. It would not be the first time in this country that a project costs more than expected. How does the government intend to finance cost Financing is the biggest concern for this project. The cost of overruns, if any? I suppose that a responsible government has this bridge—which is clearly a megaproject—is estimated at thought of something. If this is the case, I would like to know $850 million. It would not be the first time that on a project of about it and we would like to know who will take over the this magnitude, and for which we have no precedents, there responsibilities if the project is a disaster in terms of construc- would be cost overruns. tion. It is important for us to know that.

Already, according to my information, a study by Wood–Gor- (1155) don revealed, last year, that the cost could be about $1.3 billion. Today—faced with a rather innovative project for which experts Mr. Speaker, you will appreciate that there was a time when have already said that the cost could be at least 50 per cent the financial situation of the government was sound and perhaps higher—how can we say with any degree of certainty that the those questions were less important. But when the government cost will be $850 million? is preparing to cut social programs and health care programs, or any other program for that matter, because money is tight, I do not want to use this argument to block the project, but I because our deficit is over $40 billion a year, we have reasons to am trying to point out to this House, the government and the hon. be concerned with this issue at this point. Surely the government members on the other side, that it would not be the first time in has thought of some way to overcome cost overruns, if any, and this country that the cost of a megaproject balloons way beyond they have to explain what their intentions are. the government’s initial estimates, and that the government is stuck with the deal and forced to pay, at taxpayers’ expense, We are also concerned with maintenance. I did not come millions of dollars more to finish the project. across any estimates in the documents made available to us. They probably exist, but I did not find them. I would like the I do not think that we can conclude this debate without the government to answer the following: What are the estimated minister being present, and he is not in the House right now. costs for the maintenance of this structure each year? Would the costs be paid for by the consortium that will be in charge of bridge management? Have any maximum costs been estab- The Acting Speaker (Mr. Kilger): I wish to remind hon. lished? If the maintenance costs are higher than expected or if members that it is our tradition not to make any comments on the there are major problems, who will pay the tab? Will the absence of a member. We all know that hon. members are very government take some responsibility then or will the promoters busy. I just wish to remind hon. members that they should not deal with the unexpected costs and other potential risks? It comment on the absence of another member. would be important to know about that.

1357

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders Although it is not the same type of structure, one knows that There is no assurance that the people will easily adapt to the a bridge built over salt water is likely to be subjected to more necessary social reorganization because of job losses following damage than elsewhere. Therefore, the maintenance costs are this negative change. Will the bridge create a positive spin–off likely to be proportionate to the location of this bridge, to the in terms of job creation for the residents of the Island and of New fact that it is an extremely long bridge located, one has to admit, Brunswick? Maybe. We hope for the best but it is far from sure in an area with a very harsh climate, in the heart of the gulf and I see a lot of ill defined areas in the whole employment of St. Lawrence and subject to significant weather and climatic issue. The government would do well to look more closely into it variations. It would therefore be useful to be given all the in order to come up with better answers than it did up to now. information regarding the responsibility of the government with respect to maintenance costs or in case of possible major [English] structural failure. Hon. David Anderson (Minister of National Revenue): Mr. These are matters which require some clarification. This Speaker, I have a quick comment on the member’s speech. project economically is so very important for this region. We must therefore ensure that it is a success in terms of both its First, there appears to be some confusion between him and the construction and its operation. Leader of the Opposition on the environmental effects and the satisfaction on this. I trust that they will straighten out this apparent discrepancy. I know that my colleagues opposite agree that it must be a success. But it is not enough to say it. It is not enough to say that I would also like to point out that many of the questions which we want it to be a success in terms of its construction and its he wished to pose to the minister were in fact replied to in the maintenance, to be a success in social an economic terms, to be a minister’s address. I do not know whether the hon. member was success for the company that will be in charge of its operation, here at the time. Perhaps he was talking to a colleague. However, also for the government which is going to be watching people many of the questions that were raised were, as I understand it, coming and going and which, with this structure, is going to link from at least a failure to appreciate what the minister was an isolated province with the continent. We all want that project saying. to be a success in all those respects, but again, it is not enough to just say so. The hon. member mentions the absence of the minister. I would like to point out that almost immediately behind the The government must act in a responsible manner. It must minister sits his parliamentary secretary, the hon. member for give all the necessary explanations. It must look for every St. Boniface. I believe it is important for all members to aspect, even the smallest one, which may be a problem or about recognize the tremendous support that ministers receive from which people may have concerns in order not to embark, once their parliamentary secretaries. These members accept addition- again, on an unending adventure which finally will result in all al responsibilities and do a tremendous job, particularly on Canadian taxpayers paying for something which does not even detailed questions such as the one the member put. work properly. While I do not wish to build up the hon. member’s perfor- A lot of questions have been left unanswered. I think it is for mance to levels of high expectation, we fully expect all ques- the House, during this debate, to answer them. tions of this type to be very carefully analysed and dealt with by the parliamentary secretary. (1200) I have a parliamentary secretary sitting just behind the member for St. Boniface and she is of immense help in debates In conclusion, I would like the people mandated by the such as this in dealing with questions. When she speaks on such minister to answer all those questions. Like my colleague from questions I want it known, just as when the member for St. Bourassa, I would like to express my concern over the possible Boniface speaks on such questions, that these people are acting job losses—nearly 400 jobs, roughly 350 jobs—that this project on behalf of the minister. In fact, quite often they speak more entails, since the bridge’s operation will not require as many eloquently than ministers. We are very happy with the support employees as a ferry service. that is given.

I can understand why so many discussions were held with so I am sure the hon. member will want to correct the impression many people. Before a company closes shop, there are always a given that somehow the parliamentary secretary is not able to lot of discussions between manpower centres, economic devel- handle the questions he put. I know full well that when the opment corporations and other stakeholders, in order to find parliamentary secretary rises to speak we will have a detailed alternatives, retrain employees, etc. Such a situation results in a and careful analysis of the questions. The hon. member I am significant reduction of net employment in the area, where sure, being a man who is very fair in his approach in the House, needs are great. will find the answers extremely acceptable.

1358

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders It is important to point out that if at any particular moment the say that I agreed to a project when I really had reservations. I did minister of public works happens to be out of the House we can agree to it but at the same time, I did ask for explanations from rest assured that the presence of his parliamentary secretary the minister. There is nothing wrong with that. This is typical of backstops very well that absence. The same is true in my case. I debates in the House, and I would appreciate a more serious was away from the House yesterday on business in Vancouver follow up, instead of having someone put words in my mouth. and I had absolutely no compunction in leaving everything related to my department in the hands of my parliamentary I cannot understand the minister’s approach and, when I look secretary who, as I mentioned before, is a person whose skills at his answer, I wonder if he understands it himself. and ability I have high regard for. [English]

I trust the hon. member will recognize there are ministers in Mrs. Jane Stewart (Brant): Mr. Speaker, I listened with the House from time to time but we have full confidence in the interest to the hon. member’s 20 minutes and to the speech given ability of our parliamentary secretaries. If the hon. member was by his leader. not here to hear the minister and thus had questions about what he did not hear, we would be— They acknowledge that this is an amendment to the Constitu- tion and with glee seem to recognize the government’s recogni- (1205) tion of the referendum that occurred on the island and the importance of it. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Kilger): I wonder if I could ask the co–operation of the House on the issue of the absence and They seem to be setting this discussion up as a precedent for presence of members. As we all know the demands on every- something. What I did not hear them speak about is the message one’s time are of such a nature that all members are not able to the minister gave about the importance of this fixed link not be in the House at all times. I know we would want to extend that only for the people of P.E.I. but for all Canadians. respect to one another. I would suggest to the hon. member that if they are looking at this discussion today as a precedent for something, they should I believe the minister had concluded his remarks. I will now remember that it is important that things discussed in this House ask— be for the benefit of all Canadians. I would suggest that some of the initiatives which the hon. member might be suggesting in the [Translation] future will not be for the benefit of all Canadians.

Does the hon. member for Roberval want to add something to I believe that the direction of the party and its focus on the comments of the Minister of National Revenue? solidifying Quebec may not be for the best of all Canadians, nor in fact for the benefit of all Quebecers. However I hesitate to Mr. Gauthier (Roberval): Mr. Speaker, when a cabinet speak on their behalf. I would like to recommend that to the member hears what he wants to hear, then there is certainly member and have him remember that when the minister was reason for concern. speaking about the importance of this fixed link, he focused on the value for the whole country. Remarks that were never part of my speech have just been attributed to me. I never said that the parliamentary secretary (1210) was unable to answer questions. Never. Is that what the minister understood? Such behaviour in the House on the part of a [Translation] minister is cause for concern. I never said any such thing. But I did raise many questions to which the minister was unable to Mr. Gauthier: Mr. Speaker, I am absolutely flabbergasted. I provide explanations in his speech. can hardly respond to what the hon. member has just said, that is, that the results of a referendum on an issue which she considers of national interest should be binding but that those of The Minister of National Revenue has just told us that the a referendum held on an issue she does not consider to be of minister has answered all questions asked by the hon. member. national interest should not have the same value nor should they Either the minister hears only what he wants to hear or we are concern this House in the same way. facing a problem as far as interpretation or understanding is concerned. There is definitely a problem. Mr. Raymond Lavigne (Verdun—Saint–Paul): True.

My questions deserve answers. If the parliamentary secretary Mr. Gauthier (Roberval): Mr. Speaker, I hear comments to can answer them, he has only to rise and do so. That is why, the effect that this is true. That is quite serious. If, for the other considering how time is important in the House, I nevertheless side, respect of the democratic process— spent 20 minutes to question a project in a reasonable, correct, appropriate and parliamentary manner. I do not want people to An hon. member: We have to listen to this?

1359

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders Mr. Gauthier (Roberval): Indeed, you do. If, for the other community. An official in the construction industry had said side, respect of the democratic process is important only when it that the link is not just an economic boost, it is really the only suits their purpose, Mr. Speaker, then it is time they say so. game in town.

I think that, in our country, the results of a democratic I realize that on P.E.I. support for the link was not, is not and consultation should always be binding whatever the conse- probably never will be unanimous. When the plebiscite was held quences. If, on the other side, there are members who think that in 1988 the results were 60 per cent to 40 per cent, approximate- the results of democratic consultation should not be binding ly. Since then support has grown steadily. Recent estimates when they do not serve their political interest, then I would urge indicate that it now ranges in the area of 75 per cent to 80 per them to discuss it with the Prime Minister. They seem to have a cent in favour of the fixed link. Every effort was made to provide problem within their caucus. I am not sure the Prime Minister forums for legitimate opponents of the project to lay before the would be proud if he knew that his party members plan to apply legislative committee their reasons for opposition. referendum results only when they suit them. We take notice of that. (1215)

[English] During the House of Commons legislative committee hear- ings last March we went to great lengths to promote a balance in Mr. Joe McGuire (Egmont): Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure for witnesses between the proponents of the fixed link and the me to address this amendment, secure in the knowledge that the opponents of the project. construction of the fixed link is part of the government’s program. All that remains is passage of the resolution to amend Over 200 new members in the House did not participate in the the terms of the union between P.E.I. and the Dominion of debates of the 34th Parliament when we passed Bill C–110 Canada. which enabled the project to proceed. When the legislation was enacted here we had already gone through the questions raised I want to thank my colleague, the hon. member for Cape by the member for Roberval and other members. They are all in Breton—East Richmond, the minister of public works. He has the records, whether in the legislative committee record or in the been a longstanding advocate and promoter of Atlantic Canada House debates of last March, May and June. Many of the and he earned the gratitude of the vast majority of P.E.I. questions being raised today have already been debated and residents with his strong support for the construction of the answered to the best of our ability. If hon. members would like fixed link. I have been a supporter of the fixed link since day to read what transpired in the House when Bill C–110 dealing one, having voted for it in the plebiscite in 1988. with the fixed link went through, they should do so.

For all members present, I would like to clarify a topic which Today we are mainly concerned with amending the Constitu- has just been addressed by the hon. member for Roberval and tion. The legislation to build a fixed link has already passed. I two other members of the House. Prince Edward Island never can understand the curiosity and the questions hon. members are had a referendum on the fixed link. Prince Edward Island had a coming up with today. plebiscite on the fixed link. There is a distinct difference between the two. A referendum is binding in law. A plebiscite is As I said earlier, despite local opposition in some quarters not binding. support among islanders has continued to grow. We are here today to deal with the final legal obstacle, a court ordered Premier Ghiz wanted to test how the people of Prince Edward constitutional amendment which would allow a fixed link, a Island felt about the construction of a fixed link. Therefore he bridge, to replace the steam service guaranteed in P.E.I.’s called for a plebiscite. It was not binding on him to continue no original terms of union. We were ordered to do this by Madam matter what the result was. All he wanted to do was test public Justice Reed in a 1992 decision. opinion to see whether he should go ahead. If the people of Prince Edward Island at that time had said they did not support I want to remind the House in the strongest possible terms that the fixed link, he was prepared to endorse the voice of islanders the Government of Prince Edward Island has already endorsed and not proceed. this amendment and has done so unanimously. The federal government, the Government of Prince Edward Island and the There was never a referendum taken of the people of Prince Government of New Brunswick have endorsed the project. In Edward Island on the fixed link. If any member opposite or on effect it is saying yes to Atlantic Canada. this side believes it was the case, it never was. Because of the inefficiencies of the present ferry system the Since the House gave approval to the project last June 15 in project will allow the federal government to fulfil its responsibi- Bill C–110, my decision to support the link has been reinforced. lities to provide an adequate transportation–communication Even though link construction is really only in its infancy, one service between P.E.I. and the mainland. The project will allow can feel a sense of hope and optimism permeating the island P.E.I. to share in the transportation vision which opened up other

1360

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders parts of Canada to growth and development. The project is The naysayers have raised questions about the environment, reflective of the spirit of our federal state. the fisheries and the ferry workers. The courts have ruled that all reasonable measures have been taken. Any potential adverse environmental effects of the specific bridge proposal were This is why I am happy to be here today to speak one more either insignificant or mitigable with known technology. In the time in support of the project. The history of the idea and the fishery an agreement has already been reached which will development of the concept of a fixed link have been discussed provide compensation to fishermen for any disruption or loss of at length and are matters of record. So too are the numerous access during the construction period. debates and studies conducted in relation to the particular project. As I said earlier we went through the whole process last spring and early summer. Discussions for ferry worker compensation are under way. This booklet will tell us exactly what moves we are making toward the ferry workers on retraining, job opportunities, early Since this is the case I want to move to the primary purpose of retirement and so on. That will all be developed over the next the debate today, that is to amend P.E.I.’s terms of union, and put number of years to address the concerns of the ferry workers, on record the original clause. The original terms of union state: which is a very important aspect of the whole discussion.

That the Dominion Government shall assume and defray all the charges of the following services—efficient steam service for the conveyance of mails and The scales are heavily weighed on the positive pro–link side. passengers, to be established and maintained between the island and the mainland of Economic activity will grow. It will grow during the construc- the Dominion, winter and summer, thus placing the island in continuous tion period and it will grow in the years afterward. The link will communication with the Intercolonial Railroad and the railroad system of the Dominion. generate experience and create jobs. P.E.I. has a desperate need for jobs.

Today’s amendment will provide a fixed crossing, a bridge, as This is the biggest infrastructure program ever undertaken in a replacement for a steam service. As most hon. members know Atlantic Canada. There will never be an opportunity as great as we do not have a railway system in P.E.I. any more. We are the one we now have. It is time to get on with it. basically connecting our car–truck service to the roads and highways of the rest of Canada. In that vein I want to close with a quote from Rob Matthews, business editor of the Halifax Chronicle Herald and the Mail It has taken over 120 years and over 90 studies to bring about a Star, in his column of February 4. In part he said: ‘‘The issues change that is already providing benefit to Atlantic Canada. In have already been studied sufficiently for elected and appointed 1988 the Government of P.E.I. crystallized the issue by holding officials to decide the crossing was worth while politically, a plebiscite. The positive results of the plebiscite provided the economically and environmentally. There must be an end to stimulus which brought the concept of the link to reality. The discussions at some reasonable point. Sadly valuable projects numerous studies and actions taken subsequent to the plebiscite are often beset by those who want the process to deliver only have addressed the concerns of the people and the governments their solution or, failing that, another process that will. Entre- involved. preneurs and governments have come to understand that some- one will object to almost any construction project. These days there is no single body of opinion on anything. It is much the (1220 ) same with public assessments in which the same few voices and personalities vie for the spotlight, unwilling to accept reality or unable to comprehend that action not paralysis brings jobs and It is time to recognize that the project makes immense good development. There are great benefits ahead as a result of the sense. It has united business and labour in Prince Edward Island. fixed link. The sooner we can attain them the better’’. It has brought political opponents together in common cause. In the previous Parliament the Conservative government was basi- [Translation] cally sponsoring the legislation and the Liberal Party at the time joined with the government in supporting it. Mr. Antoine Dubé (Lévis): Mr. Speaker, the hon. member gave his definition of referendum and plebiscite and he under- The organization, Islanders for a Better Tomorrow, spear- lined that since, in this case, it was only a plebiscite, its results headed support for the link and deserve credit and recognition were not binding on the government, which decided nonethe- for its efforts. This group and all other link supporters believe less, as we can see today, to respect the will of the people and go the project is of tremendous importance to the future of P.E.I. ahead with the project. and Atlantic Canada. It will provide an opportunity for P.E.I. to establish itself as a key player in a revitalized economy in I also wanted to talk about traffic. Having travelled several Atlantic Canada. It will be an opportunity for our province to be times to Prince Edward Island, I can say that the bridge will no recognized for other things than its small size, equalization doubt have the effect of increasing car traffic on the island. payments and potatoes. Everybody knows that to go to the Magdalen Islands, one has to

1361

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders drive across Prince Edward Island to take the ferry at Souris. in the wintertime either so I do not expect him to come to Prince Does the hon. member know about studies on increased traffic Edward Island. that could alleviate our concerns about delays on the way to the Magdalen Islands? Can he comment on that? The question on the plebiscite did not include any options. The tunnel was never on the ballot as an option. It was strictly: (1225 ) ‘‘Are you in favour of a fixed link?’’ The people who were bidding for the fixed link considered in the development of a proposal the option of a tunnel. I think they found only one [English] bidder who actually went into the matter of the tunnel to any great depth. Even that company felt it was much too expensive Mr. McGuire: Mr. Speaker, in reference to the hon. mem- to continue any further exploration of that option and that the ber’s question about a plebiscite, the federal government was in most economic option was the bridge option. no way, shape or form involved in it. The plebiscite was strictly within the province of P.E.I. It was held to give the government, It was not considered at all on the plebiscite. The people who under Premier Ghiz at that time, an indication of what the did look into it on the construction side and the bidder side felt islanders felt about a fixed link to the mainland. It had nothing to there were many environmental problems with the tunnel. It was do with the federal government. The federal government was not not an economically viable option. even remotely involved with the project at that time. It was merely a sampling of public opinion as to what islanders On the member’s second question, the provincial legislature actually felt about the fixed link. last spring passed a unanimous resolution endorsing the consti- tutional amendment to the terms of union between P.E.I. and the As far as getting to Magdalen Island, which is part of the Dominion of Canada. That has already gone through its legisla- beautiful province of Quebec, I would think a fixed link would ture. It is a resolution only. It was directed, as we are directed make it a lot easier. The member would not have to wait at Cape today by Madam Justice Reed, that this had to happen before the Tormentine for any length of time. He could simply drive up, bridge could be legally used in place of a ferry system. drive over the bridge, continue on his way to Surrey and catch the ferry to Magdalen Island. He would be able to spend more (1230 ) time there once the fixed link was built. Ms. Mary Clancy (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Mr. Len Taylor (The Battlefords—Meadow Lake): Mr. Citizenship and Immigration): Mr. Speaker, it is a very great Speaker, I will be very brief. I have a question of clarification privilege to join in this debate today. It is a particular privilege for the member for Egmont who just spoke. to follow the hon. member for Egmont who for such a long time has been an advocate in this House for all of the interests of his I visited his constituency on several occasions. I find it to be a home province of Prince Edward Island. He has been such an very beautiful part of our country. I am slightly envious of him advocate for the establishment of the fixed link. in representing that constituency. I know he would be of my constituency as well. I invite him to visit any time he wishes to Before I continue, Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate do so. you on your appointment. It is a delight to have you in the chair. I am sure you will prosper there with all of us to be your sheep, shall I say. I have two points of clarification. The first has to do with the plebiscite. Could the member confirm my recollection that With regard to this debate, in the more than five years I have when the plebiscite was held the question implied that perhaps been privileged to be a member of this House representing a the fixed link could be a safe underground tunnel as much as it riding in Atlantic Canada, I have stood countless times and could be the construction of a bridge? spoken on matters of great and indeed of crucial interest to the people of our region. Frequently we have looked at the possibili- Second, I heard him say in his speech that the constitutional ties of development for employment, development to create a amendment we are discussing today has been dealt with in the better climate for business, development in the area of natural Prince Edward Island legislature. I was not aware of that. Could resources and so on and so forth. We have met walls because of the member clarify if the amendment has been dealt with in the our small population. We have met difficulties because of the Prince Edward Island legislature, including the parts about tolls problem of distances, as in every region of this country, et and possible privatization of the structure? cetera.

Mr. McGuire: Mr. Speaker, I invite the hon. member to It is with particular gratification that I stand today to speak in revisit Prince Edward Island any time, and all members of the support of the constitutional amendment to enable the building House. It is the best place one could possibly visit in the of the fixed link crossing between New Brunswick and Prince summertime. I would not want to visit the hon. member’s riding Edward Island.

1362

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders There are many reasons that this fixed link is a superb idea. the middle of the strait for over seven hours. He took the Members much more involved from the provinces of Prince opportunity to make a public speech right there and he got a Edward Island and New Brunswick have articulated these ideas, good crowd, as island politicians usually do. He spoke about the but I would like to talk just about one area where I see the fixed fact that the ferry really did not fulfil the constitutional agree- link making a difference. It was very interesting that a member ment to create a proper link and a proper mode of transportation questioned my colleague from Egmont about the traffic and to and from Prince Edward Island. about getting to Iles–de–la–Madeleine, which is the area I want to talk about. That happened 26 years ago this month. I remember it very well. Consequently most of my subsequent trips to Prince In spite of all of the setbacks and drawbacks in Atlantic Edward Island have been by air or in the summertime, but I have Canada, we think we really are the most fortunate people in the never forgotten the passion with which Premier Campbell country. If one is fortunate enough to live in Atlantic Canada, addressed this issue. particularly in Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island is normally the vacation place of choice. I must say New Brunswick is also, but we like to go to P.E.I. for the beaches, the wonderful golf I discussed this issue on many occasions because, as the courses, the great food, the terrific restaurants, and on and on. member for Egmont can tell you, I was not a total convert to the concept in the beginning. The member for Egmont, the Secre- I have been visiting Prince Edward Island as a tourist since I tary of State for Veterans, two other premiers of Prince Edward was a small child. I have jokingly referred to the fixed link from Island, Premier Callbeck and former Premier Ghiz, and the time to time as the span of Green Gables. That reminds us why present member for Malpeque have all had a part in convincing young women in this country consider a visit to Prince Edward me that this is absolutely the right thing, not just for the people Island to be practically a religious experience: the shrine of of Prince Edward Island, not just for the people of Atlantic Anne of Green Gables and that great Canadian writer, and Canada but for the people of Canada. It will create the access we feminist I might add, Lucy Maud Montgomery. need and deserve to get to the cradle of Confederation, one of Canada’s unique beauty spots. I have spent many hours as a child, as an adolescent and as an adult sitting in a car, usually at Cape Tormentine, waiting for a Members who have been here for any length of time know and ferry. I remember one particular visit at this time of year. When new members will learn very soon that being members of Joe says he does not want to go to the Battlefords in February he Parliament gives us a very privileged sense of the country as a is probably right. However, getting to P.E.I. in February can be whole, as a unit from sea to sea to sea. quite something too when one is dependent upon the mercy of the ferry in the Northumberland Strait when the ice is in. To go to Charlottetown and see where the fathers, sent by the mothers, of Confederation first met to discuss what would There was a meeting. It was the kick–off to a very famous happen in 1867 gives one a very particular and very warm view political campaign. The Atlantic provinces student Liberals of what the politicians of the day were struggling over, arguing were meeting in Charlottetown in 1968 to decide whose students over, negotiating and deciding to do for Canadians then and now. would support the leadership of a great political party. A group Young Canadians from the other nine provinces would benefit of us from Halifax headed out for Tormentine. Given that it was from visiting, seeing and spending time in the cradle of Confed- February we did pretty well. We arrived there in about four eration. I agree that we would all benefit, young people in hours from Halifax. We then waited for six hours until the old particular, from seeing all the parts of this magnificent country. Abegweit could get into the dock. We got on the Abegweit. I think normally it takes about 45 minutes to cross in good Tourism is one of Prince Edward Island’s major industries and weather, but seven and a half hours later we landed in P.E.I. It is we certainly do not see people staying away because of the one thing when it is a group of students. We had a good time on ferries. However, as we enter a more modern age heading toward that ferry. the year 2000 it is only sensible to ensure that access to that An hon. member: I suspect you did. province be done in the most sensible, safest and time saving way. That is why those of us in this House from the province of (1235) Nova Scotia stand in great support of our colleagues from Prince Edward Island and in great support of our colleagues from New Ms. Clancy: Yes, we did. We really did not mind a whole lot Brunswick. the almost seven hour extension of the trip. Another thing I would like to bring to the attention of the I remember we were met on that illustrious morning by one of House is the fact that this fixed link is going to create an Prince Edward Island’s most famous sons. I refer to Premier incredible number of jobs. In the provinces of Prince Edward Alec Campbell as he then was and who today is Mr. Justice Island, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick the creation of jobs is Campbell of the island’s supreme court. Premier Campbell was something every one of us is committed to and I can only say it is not very happy on that day. He knew the ferry had been frozen in with an almost spiritual fervour. We do not like to be considered

1363

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders the poor relations of Confederation. We do not like to be called In talking about the benefits of the fixed link to tourism I was the have not provinces. remiss in not particularly mentioning the Caribou–Wood Islands service. It is essentially a summertime service and is also a great (1240 ) boon to tourism. The ferries on that line are built in the shipyard in Pictou county and all of us want nothing more than to see this line continue. It too is a wonderful way to travel between Prince This fixed link will create an economic boom and an advan- Edward Island and Nova Scotia to get the benefits of two of the tage to business and tourism. I am in favour and I say three most beautiful places on earth, that is Prince Edward Island and cheers for those who decided to go ahead with the fixed link. Pictou county.

Ms. Roseanne Skoke (Central Nova): Mr. Speaker, I lis- I know when the hon. member speaks with her passionate tened with interest to my colleague, the hon. member from Nova devotion to the people of her area they can be assured of the Scotia. safety of that line and the continued interest in both the use of that line for tourism and business. The two access points to As the member for Central Nova, the issue of the fixed link is Prince Edward Island, to New Brunswick and Nova Scotia can one of major concern in my riding. It is recognized that the work very well together in harmony and to the benefit of all Northumberland bridge, the fixed link to Prince Edward Island, Canadians. is a link to economic opportunity and progress for Prince Edward Island and all of Atlantic Canada. This link will create Mr. (Fraser Valley East): Mr. Speaker, in May job opportunities for Atlantic Canadians throughout construc- 1873 the government of Sir John A. Macdonald passed an act tion of the bridge and maintenance thereafter. It will create admitting Prince Edward Island to Confederation. A month later opportunity for tourism and economic progress. his cabinet approved an order in council which also promised the ‘‘efficient steam service for the conveyance of mails and However in my riding of Central Nova some concerns have passengers to be established and maintained thus placing the been expressed regarding competition between the fixed link at island in continuous communication with the intercolonial one end of the island and the ferry service at the other end. The railway and the railway system of the Dominion’’. employees of the ferry service rely upon this means for commer- cial and domestic transport and for carrying tourists from The provision of that order in council has now become part of Caribou to Wood Islands. The shipbuilding industry and Steel- our present day Constitution. The promise has been kept for 121 workers of America Union rely upon the building of new ferries years. Today it is the intention of both the federal government and the maintenance of those existing for their livelihood. and that of Prince Edward Island to change the wording of the clause but not the promise itself, thus committing the federal I wish to reassure the people of Central Nova that the government to a fixed link instead of a ferry service. competing interests between one end of the island and the other and competing interests between New Brunswick and Nova (1245 ) Scotia along with the competing interests of construction work- ers, ferry workers and shipbuilders can be very readily recon- At the outset I want the House to note the intention of our ciled. forefathers. Their intent was obvious. They were clearly intend- ing to obligate the federal government to keep the island in The fixed link will create employment opportunity as well as continuous communication with the mainland. The mode of tourism opportunity for all of us in Atlantic Canada. It will in no transportation by ferry was also specified and the federal way diminish the importance of the ferry service running government wishes to confirm that same intention. However, between Wood Islands and Caribou. The continuation and today it wants to specify a different mode of transportation. upgrading of the ferry service between Caribou and Wood Islands will create opportunities for tourism and economic The does not wish to argue that a progress in Central Nova and for the province of Nova Scotia. bridge would not be beneficial to Prince Edward Island. Com- mon assent to the plan has been given by provincial plebiscite Therefore on behalf of the people of Central Nova I support and resolution. the motion put forward this morning by the hon. minister of public works. I thank my learned colleague for her comments. The fixed link has weathered protests by environmentalists and engineers who argue that the bridge will be unhealthy or Ms. Clancy: Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the hon. unsafe. It has endured bad press, public dispute and court member from that great riding of Central Nova which for the challenges and now all that remains is to change this clause. No first time in many years boasts a member from the Liberal Party. one argues that the bridge will mean more prosperity for the I congratulate her on her election and on her comments this maritimes and increased economic development for Prince morning. Edward Island in particular.

1364

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders The principle of a bridge replacing a ferry is not the substance However, there is an additional problem. The government of our complaint today. The Reform Party wants nothing but through a constitutional amendment will continue to commit increased prosperity for all of the maritime provinces. However, itself not just to the fixed link but to the original intention of the the federal cabinet should not pass an Order in Council today to clause written in 1873. That intent is to place the island in change this clause. To alter it today requires an amendment to continuous communication with the mainland. the Constitution, that document foundational to our nation, the instrument which defines our political system and, more specifi- What if problems are to develop? What if the bridge suffers cally, defines the nature of the relationship between provinces cost overruns of more than 10 per cent? Another member and the federal government. indicated that it may double. Other projects around the world such as the tunnel under the English Channel or the Hibernia oil project nearby have experienced vast cost overruns. We all know I address two different audiences today. To the audience in the appalling record of past federal governments in this regard. Prince Edward Island, I understand why it needs this bridge or We will be committed to a bridge no matter what problems why it wants it. It will be good for that province and I think there occur. is widespread public support in Canada for the bridge. What if, God forbid, this bridge should collapse? The govern- To my second audience, the Government of Canada, what it is ment will be constitutionally obligated to rebuild it. The ques- attempting to do in this House today is both incorrect and tion I am asking here is a serious one. By constitutional unwise. Allow me to explain what I mean. amendment all members of the federation will be committed to providing a fixed link with the mainland forever.

The Government of Canada is proceeding under section 43 of (1250 ) the Canadian Constitution which reads:

An amendment to the Constitution of Canada in relation to any provision that If the bridge is rendered unusable for periods of time during applies to one or more, but not all, provinces—may be made by proclamation issued the winter or encounters other major problems, the intent of the by the Governor General. constitutional amendment will still stand. Continuous commu- nication with the mainland will have to be maintained by the The government assumes that it can safely proceed under this government. In other words, if the fixed link proves unworkable section because it also assumes that this issue relates only to the the government will still have to provide a ferry service. federal government and two or three provinces. Is this really the case? Could it be true that the provision of a fixed link to Prince Speaking outside of constitutional law, the government could Edward Island involves all the provinces of Canada, not only the not allow an entire province to be cut off from the mainland for maritime provinces? I submit that although this amendment very long. A ferry would have to be provided if the bridge proves does not apply directly to every province of Canada, it affects to be unreliable. If it comes to a disagreement and finally to law, every province in an important and substantive way and there- the people of Prince Edward Island could demand a ferry service fore the government could be acting improperly. through the courts if necessary. The member for Lac–Saint–Jean noted the ambiguity between If changes are necessary at this time, it should proceed in a the French and English versions of this amendment earlier today fairer and more conventional manner by way of section 38 of the when he mentioned that in one version it says they may and in Constitution, a section which at least attempts to involve the the other it says they will. That is still unclear. It is a moot point. input of all Canadians. We will be obligated and in this case we will be obligated to this continuous communication. How are other provinces involved? This venture is a shared cost venture and these costs are not shared between just one In that case the cost of this constant communication with the province and the federal government. The subsidy which now mainland would effectively double. This is a much greater operates the ferries is taken from the federal government’s commitment than the government would now have us believe. general revenue. Who contributes to the federal treasury, all This is a significant commitment that every province in Canada provinces or just a few? All provinces are involved today in deserves to address through a resolution under the current subsidizing Prince Edward Island’s ferries and we are happy to constitutional arrangements by each legislature under the au- do so. thority of section 38 of the Constitution. Although it is clear to me that the government is acting However, the estimated cost of the bridge, $850 million and incorrectly, perhaps unlawfully and certainly unwisely, I do not climbing, will also be borne in some fashion by all members of propose a legal remedy. Constitutional change should never be the federation because the federal government will subsidize forced on the nation in the name of expediency. If the govern- this bridge to the amount of $43 million per year for the next 35 ment insists on proceeding in this manner, there is a simple years. This is not an insignificant sum. This kind of significant resolution which lies in the decision of the Federal Court of commitment requires the approval of all Canadians. Canada given in March of last year. Madam Justice Reed there

1365

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders indicated that a discontinuance of the ferry service must be mistakes we made in the past and we will not repeat these as we sanctioned by a constitutional amendment. We agree to that. She try to guide our nation forward into the future’’. gave the House of Commons no direction as to the wording of that amendment in the form of a resolution. (1255 ) That god passed into the history books along with the Roman If the government must go ahead with this change, and I Empire but we can learn from that concept. When it comes to repeat many of us feel this is not the way to go about constitu- constitutional change, if we ignore what we have gone through tional change, it should reword its resolution to reaffirm the in the past few years as we plan for the future, we are making a constitutional intent to provide constant communication with serious mistake in the House of Commons. the mainland but to despecify the mode of transportation re- quired. To be very clear, the amendment would promise a The Canadian voter is no longer tolerant of politicians who continuous link with the mainland, period. fall victim to what we describe as Ottawa fever as soon as they are elected. This disease results, as we have talked about before, in selective hearing, poor memory and the inability to discern In this way the government would have a free hand to choose the common sense of average Canadians. Ottawa fever killed the least expensive transportation option in the future while still both a government and a national party just a few months ago. carrying through with its plans for a bridge today. Has this government learned from the mistakes of the Conserva- tives? Here the Government of Canada would not be committing all provinces to provide a fixed link for all time and at any cost, and I have a genuine fear that this House and this government are under no circumstances could Canada be legally obliged to embarking on a legislative program, including these constitu- provide a bridge and a ferry service at the same time. tional changes, that shows that they have the early symptoms of Ottawa fever.

Although this legal argument is significant, it does not form The finance minister talks about filling the loopholes and the basis of our objection to this resolution. Our objection broadening the tax base in the upcoming budget. He puts a pretty springs from a root that goes far deeper than a simple legal spin on an ugly subject by saying that Canadians want to technicality. The Constitution of Canada defines the relation- increase equity in the tax system, which is just another way of ship between provinces and the federal government. The amend- saying that the government wants more out of the taxpayers. ing formula is the way to redefine or to change these This is at a time when taxpayers are pleading with the govern- relationships. If we redefine these relationships we must be ment to stop gouging them and start listening about cutting some careful to do so in a way that shows consideration for all parties. expenses. We show consideration to all parties in order to preserve good will between them. Countries are not built on technicalities. On another issue, many voters, especially the voters of They are built on relationships. Those relationships, especially Markham—Whitchurch—Stouffville, are demanding the right in this period of Canada’s history, must be preserved at all costs to recall MPs but their appeals fall on deaf ears. We cannot see or the federation is lost. any movement on this right to recall. Why is that? Why is it that no one is listening to that?

The Reform Party of Canada envisions a better process for our Now we see this government promising also an ill–defined nation, one that preserves national relationships and respects the aboriginal self–government even after the Charlottetown accord wisdom of individual Canadians, one that provides popular was soundly rejected by Canadians. How is that possible? ratification of constitutional change in a bottom–up process, not This government is running far ahead of the voters. It may a top–down process like we are experiencing here again today, even be in a different running lane, I am not sure. The House in which each concerned Canadian can participate in constitu- needs to stop pushing only the government’s agenda and start tional conventions and finally have their say through a referen- pushing ahead with the people’s agenda. dum. Is it any wonder Canadians have a negative attitude toward This government is proceeding today just as it might have 50 governments in general? If the government will not listen to years ago when it would simply pass a resolution to ask Britain Canadians and cannot put its financial house in order, how will it to change the BNA Act. This process is no longer acceptable to possibly deal with wisdom regarding constitutional issues Canadians. which form the foundation of that house? The Constitution has been the focus of much needless hurt in I think of the case of the Roman Empire. At the start of every our nation. It started with the patriation in 1981, a unilateral major undertaking they would pray to the god Janus. Janus was a action which caused the rancorous constitutional conferences of two faced god who looked into both the past and the future. They the mid–eighties. These led to the political disasters of Meech hoped to be guided by this god who would say: ‘‘These are the Lake and the Charlottetown accord. Out of them emerged the

1366

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders Bloc Quebecois and a full–blown separatist movement that balanced package of positive, popular constitutional amend- threatens to split our nation in two. ments that included perhaps a re–worded amendment for the benefit of Prince Edward Island. Today, what do we find? Yet another amendment to the Constitution, virtually free of national debate, unfettered by Today the Canadian people expect to participate in the most consultation with anyone with Prince Edward Island, slipped important decision that the House can make. It is foolhardy to under the noses of parliamentarians as if the last decade simply push their patience once again regarding constitutional change. disappeared. It appears that the government has learned nothing from the mistakes of the past. I would therefore ask the Prime Minister to reconsider the process by which this decision has been brought to the House. I Not only that, but the government conveniently ignores the urge all members to carefully distinguish expedient choices voices of millions of other Canadians who have said through from choices that are motivated by a concern for the future, a their votes and through other mechanisms that they are demand- search for wisdom and a love for your country. ing other changes to the Constitution, changes that they say are at least as important, possibly more important, than these. My concerns and the concerns of each of our constituencies deserve more of a hearing than a few short speeches given to a We have long advocated changes like a reformed Senate, basically empty House. entrenched property rights over which there is already a lot of general national agreement, positive changes such as a constitu- This is not mere housekeeping legislation we are considering. tional ceiling on government spending, something that would Any changes we make now become a permanent part of our ensure that undisciplined politicians could never again spend Constitution. The obligations we shoulder today will weigh on our children’s inheritance. our grandchildren a century from now. Surely this law should not be sandwiched between bills on excise taxes and port Last year the ousted Conservative Party barged ahead with a operations. This process trivializes the Constitution of Canada, constitutional change for New Brunswick, just after that very the foundation of our nation. change was rejected as part of the Charlottetown accord. Reform voted against it. Now we see this government forcing us to Hon. David Dingwall (Minister of Public Works and Gov- accept changes on behalf of Prince Edward Island. Reform once ernment Services and Minister for the Atlantic Canada again rejects the process that ignores the cries of millions of Opportunities Agency): Mr. Speaker, just a comment then a other Canadians. This process should be a source of shame to brief question to my hon. colleague opposite. this government. I did not hear the full extent of his remarks but I did pay This small amendment is no small matter. It deals with an particular attention to some of his wording. If I quote him enormous principle. It brings back memories of how our Consti- incorrectly I hope that he will do the honourable thing and tution has been mishandled over the past 15 years. The Reform advise the House that I have done so. Party of Canada opposes this amendment on three firm grounds. The first I went over at some length earlier in my presentation. It The hon. member made reference to this creeping into the is simply unwise to glibly approve a permanent, unqualified House of Commons and somehow the guillotine will come down commitment to the bridge. fairly soon on a decision which is of gargantuan importance to Canada, to the world and to other planets if you will. I am paraphrasing of course, but I understand the hon. member is new (1300 ) to the House. However new to the House does not give you the right to flagrantly abuse— The second ground is that of consultation. To satisfy voters and preserve the relationships of the federation, the government The Acting Speaker (Mr. Kilger): I know the minister is a should proceed in a way which allows input from every province very experienced parliamentarian and that he would want to and, through a referendum, every citizen. direct all of his comments through the Chair.

The third principle is that of common sense. It says: ‘‘First Mr. Dingwall: Mr. Speaker, as I was making my point things first. We ought not approach the House lightly on such through you to the hon. member, it does not give him the right to weighty subjects. There are other important constitutional is- abuse flagrantly and selectively some of the discussions which sues that could be and should be dealt with at the same time’’. took place in this Chamber not more than a year ago. He suggested in his remarks that somehow this evil thing that we To sum up, the Reform Party would be very pleased if one day put before Parliament today was concocted, if you will, in the at the end of a proper consultative process the House dealt with a back rooms. It has been around for five full years.

1367

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders I cannot understand why the hon. member would try to give that kind of legislation forward, he will have widespread support that impression to his constituents. Perhaps we might wish to on this side of the House. I am starting to get a little wound up have a recall of the hon. member’s ability to remember all of the myself but I mentioned it clearly if the minister was listening to facts and all of the things that have gone on in this House. my speech.

The question I have for the hon. member is the following. I am not opposed to the idea of a bridge. The bridge may be a Does the hon. member not think it appropriate that the people of wonderful idea but to cherry pick your way through the constitu- Prince Edward Island, who over 130 years ago decided that they tional orchard picking a cherry here, a cherry there, with the would become a part of Confederation, have now determined government deciding what it wants to do even if it has no through the most democratic way, namely a referendum, that support among the Canadian people at large. If there is going to they wish to amend those terms of reference which they consum- be constitutional change the people want to ratify it themselves. mated over 130 years ago? Is the hon. member saying to They proved that during the Charlottetown accord. They will not Canada’s smallest province, to that group of individuals, that accept anything less. If the government wants to check on the they no longer have that right as other Canadians in British pulse of the Canadian people, do not be afraid to go to a Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba and across this country have that referendum. The people will give it the answers it requires. They right? may well approve this change. I hope they do but the process must remain, involving all Canadians. If it does not it has no (1305) support from the Reform Party. I believe it has no support among the Canadian people. Is the hon. member suggesting in a code that because one comes from a small province, because one comes from a small Mr. Dingwall: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has a selective population base, one does not enjoy the rights that other memory. He should realize and understand that to suggest this is provinces have? Is that not what the hon. member is suggesting? cherry picking with regard to constitutional reform is utterly wrong. Mr. Strahl: Mr. Speaker, I was moved. I do not know what it is that the minister seems to get so apoplectic about every time I The Government of Canada, the Government of Prince Ed- speak. This is the second time he has become so vociferous in ward Island as well as the Government of New Brunswick his attack on me. I am not exactly sure why. signed a tripartite agreement. In order to consummate the agreement they duly signed after appropriate consultations with If I could address the points he raised I will go through them their constituents. After a referendum in the province of Prince and try to remember them all. He said that I should not use Edward Island, the Federal Court of Canada stated it was selective memory in my remarks concerning last year’s discus- necessary for that document to have full legal effect not only for sions but that I should think back to the extensive discussions. the short term but for the long term to change constitutionally the terms of reference affecting the province of Prince Edward Island and the Government of Canada. What I was trying to emphasize during my presentation was that I have not forgotten the extensive consultations of last year. I have not forgotten that other members of the House, including It is quite one thing to stand in one’s place and accuse the every other party but—not the Bloc perhaps—the Reform Party government of the day of cherry picking on constitutional of Canada were in favour of the Charlottetown accord. The reform when it is the exact opposite. The court is saying clearly Reform Party of Canada was in tune enough with the Canadian and unequivocally, if you wish to give long–term legal effect to people to know they had rejected it wholeheartedly. a binding agreement duly entered into in good faith by three separate parties, you should and must make a change in terms of I was not dissociating myself from that discussion. Of course, the constitutional reference. That is the rationale. I remember that and so should the hon. minister. Of course we want all discussions to be out in the open. Of course we want things to be decided through a referendum. When it comes to (1310) recall, if the minister thinks I am nervous of being recalled I invite him and his government to bring forward recall legisla- I am surprised that the hon. member, who is quite adept on his tion at the earliest possible moment and we will put it to the test. feet, would not be cognizant of that important fact. That is why It will not happen here. today in this legislature, as some time ago in the legislature of P.E.I., this constitutional amendment had to be put forward in It will happen first of all in Markham. I am convinced of that. order to give legal and binding effect to an agreement duly As a matter of fact I expect thousands of people to come out to entered into by three different provinces and the Government of the rally tonight to determine that. If the minister wants to bring Canada.

1368

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders Mr. Strahl Mr. Speaker, I know the minister mentioned that opposite which have, quite frankly, been largely irrelevant and he did not listen to all the earlier speeches. Perhaps this is the very much off the topic. part he forgot. I stand in my place today as a member of Parliament from I did mention that Madam Justice Reed’s decision demands a Ontario, from the riding of London—Middlesex, to speak in constitutional change. I did not argue with that either. However, favour of the motion. It is disappointing for me to hear members we are talking about process. Constitutional change affects all opposite, particularly the member for Calgary West who spoke provinces and all Canadians when it is the foundational docu- earlier today, expressing very parochial views of regional ment that guides us. We cannot say it only affects Prince Edward self–interest. This is not a time for the narrow, petty objections Island. The federal government is obligated for $43 million and we have heard so much today. It is a time to build this nation, not change a year or maybe more. It involves all Canadians. to tear it down. This is not an issue of the west versus Prince Edward Island or Atlantic Canada. This is a major project of It is why we have talked repeatedly of the need to approve national significance. Certainly it is going to benefit the prov- constitutional change through a national binding referendum. I ince of Prince Edward Island and Atlantic Canada. If it benefits am not afraid of referendums. The government has talked that part of Canada then we all benefit and I am proud to support several times about referendums and how it enjoyed the referen- it. dum process in P.E.I., how it was a positive process and how it involved people and how it has grown from 60 per cent support As Liberals we are the only truly national party in the House at to 70 per cent support today. I applaud it and I applaud the this time. Perhaps that is the reason there is a national perspec- people of Prince Edward Island. tive from this side and a very regional and limited perspective from the other side, be it from Bloc members or from Reform I am saying not to be afraid of consulting the Canadian people members. on constitutional matters. When you ask for their opinion they will give it to you as they did in the Charlottetown accord. They (1315 ) will give it again. If it is properly presented with a bottom up consultative process they will approve the necessary changes. We have heard this silly argument that if we are prepared to They would probably approve this one. It is the process and the reopen the Constitution in this matter then indeed we have to be process is wrong. ready to reopen the Constitution on any matter. To advance that in this House as a serious argument is highly ridiculous. This is a Mr. Pat O’Brien (London—Middlesex): Mr. Speaker, un- technical amendment to the Constitution. It was ordered by a like most of the members opposite I have listened to today, both judge in order to make the project possible. It is a far different from the Bloc and from Reform, I would like to do something situation from reopening the entire constitutional nightmare this interesting and actually speak to the motion that is on the floor country went through over the past several years. of this House. Frankly, my colleagues on the opposite side are making Mr. McGuire: That is a good idea. irrelevant comments or certainly are groping to hang their own particular hobby horse on this motion. Mr. O’Brien: I do not want to talk about the Senate. It might be a neat idea if we actually spoke to what the minister has put I would like to speak to the motion as it is before us. The before the House, the actual motion that is up for debate and not government has used a very open and transparent process to hear threats from members of the Bloc about a referendum that build this bridge. There have been massive public consultations. is looming in their province and their opinion or use this, as has It has been one of the most democratic processes on a major been done by several members of the Reform Party, to argue decision to be made that this country has undergone, yet we are about the Senate and the need for constant, daily referendums. still hearing objections.

We had a very decisive referendum on October 25, 1993. The There is a partnership in place with the private sector to build Canadian people spoke very clearly about the vision they have this particular project. The development company assumes the for this country. They spoke so clearly that the government has majority of the financial risks. The whole of the Canadian public had to occupy some seats on the other side of the House. Let us will benefit from this particular project. The SCDI will own and not be under any illusion about the authority of this government operate the bridge for some 35 years. It speaks very much to the and of its ability to act. idea of partnership our government put forward in its red book which was so heartily endorsed by the Canadian people. I congratulate the minister for his cautious review of this project. It was very thorough as he explained the entire North- The process has been very open. The theme is a partnership umberland Strait bridge. I applaud and congratulate him for the with the private sector. Obviously there are myriad economic restraint he has shown in the face of comments from members benefits to be achieved by this project.

1369

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders The Canadian people voted for a government which recog- be established by the developer to compensate these very nized the need to create jobs in this country. That is what the fishermen. message was in October 1993. This project will create a number of badly needed jobs. As was stated earlier by the minister there Again the environmental review has clearly shown that the will be 3,500 jobs over three and a half years in the construction project is environmentally sound and there is to be compensa- of the project. There will be another 2,000 spin–off jobs once the tion for the fishermen in the area whose livelihood will be project is built with fully 96 per cent of these new jobs to be affected. filled by Atlantic Canadians. We heard about the engineering and safety concerns of this I could be parochial and strictly take care of the needs of project. The bridge has been designed to the highest standards. It southwestern Ontario or address them in my comments today. I has a life span of 100 years before needing a major retrofit. It has do not think that is my role as a member of Parliament. We have been independently assessed by engineers and found to be very heard too much of that petty approach to politics today in this sound. House, not on this side I might add but from members opposite, unfortunately. As the member of Parliament for London—Middlesex, I want to take a national view on this. I invite members from all sides of We have to look at this as an important project to a part of our the House, particularly those members opposite, to rise above country which badly needs an economic boost. I am going to petty politics. Find some vision and courage and endorse this support it and I am pleased to see it will do so much for project which is nationally important for this country. Let us employment. move forward to the 21st century with the vision that this is our nation, all of it, from coast to coast to coast and that is the way The project will also show an increase in tourism of some 25 we have to look after it. Let us not try to set up one region against per cent. One can readily understand the spin–offs in jobs that another. will create in the service sector as Canadians find it easier to get to Prince Edward Island. I have had the opportunity to visit that It would be nice to hear the members opposite speak to the beautiful island as I hope have many other members and I intend motion with a little more national vision than what we have to go back. It will be a pleasure to cross on the bridge. heard so far. [Translation] Concern has been expressed about the ferry workers and the loss of their jobs. This is a worry for all of us. I am pleased that Mr. Benoît Sauvageau (Terrebonne): Mr. Speaker, I would the minister in tabling his statement has shown very clearly like to address some comments to my hon. colleague opposite— there will be fair treatment for the ferry workers. They will have he often refers to us as being opposite—and two questions. the first choice for employment on the bridge project. There is a fair severance package to be put in place for the displaced First of all, I found his preliminary remarks mean. He said: ‘‘I workers. As we speak consultations are under way with the for one will say something interesting’’. It is too bad for the unions to make sure this takes place. minister who, I feel, said interesting things, too bad for the Leader of the Official Opposition and too bad for the other We have heard some concerns raised about the environment. speakers. It was indeed interesting. Congratulations. One of the few relevant comments from the other side addressed the issue of the environment. However it totally ignored the fact I would also like to express disagreement with what he said that a comprehensive environmental review has taken place to about the relevancy of our remarks, and I would like to remind make sure this project is environmentally sound. In fact a him of the Constitution Act, 1791, which established the federal judge ruled that the government has taken great care in foundation for the system of parliamentary representation. The meeting the criteria of the federal environmental review. people who elected Reform Party members, or you or us in the Bloc Quebecois, know very well that the relevancy of the (1320 ) remarks we have to make in this House depends only on our opinion. On that point also I disagree with my hon. colleague. Frankly, there is no evidence whatsoever that there is any serious environmental concern with this project. In fact the over I would like to put a question to him. One of his colleagues 90 studies on the environmental aspect alone reached the spoke of a plebiscite in the case of Prince Edward Island, opposite conclusion, that the project is environmentally sound whereas the minister spoke of a referendum. With regard to the and that it will have no significant impact on the environment. referendum, this is the term you used, and we used the term you brought into the debate. Of course that would include fishermen in the area. It has been acknowledged that fishermen in the area may lose an opportuni- The Acting Speaker (Mr. Kilger): Order, please. I call the ty during construction to fish certain waters. Obviously they hon. member for Terrebonne to order. I would simply remind all will. In recognition of this a $10 million compensation fund is to members that they should refrain from directly addressing other

1370

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders members of the House and that they should put their questions support the motion. It would just be nice if those members and comments through the Chair. would speak to it.

Mr. Sauvageau: I apologize, Mr. Speaker. [Translation]

My first question to the hon. member is this: Is it a plebiscite Mr. Raymond Lavigne (Verdun—Saint–Paul): Mr. Speak- or a referendum that was held in Prince Edward Island? er, one of the extremely positive aspects of the bridge over the Northumberland Strait is that it is one of the first and most Is the hon. member’s disappointment that great because we important capital projects on which the federal government and support this proposal? Would he like it better if we opposed it? the private sector will co–operate closely. He talks about petty politics and so on, and he seems deeply Ten years ago, examples of this kind of co–operation in public disappointed. I get the impression he feels that way because we works were extremely rare. support this proposal. I am right? For the public and in practice, the distinction between public [English] sector and private sector projects was very clear. One presumed that public works like roads, sewers, energy production were Mr. O’Brien: Mr. Speaker, I would be happy to answer the carried out by governments and financed with tax revenues. This member’s questions. perception has changed entirely over the last few years.

(1325 ) In all the industrialized world and at all levels of government, we see private companies and consortiums take on infrastruc- First of all, if I might correct his comment, what I said was ture work that was previously the preserve of the public sector. that as the minister did, I intended to speak to the motion and that I would find that to be an interesting process. I thought this Conditions can change, but the basic principle is that the House was all about the process of actually rising in our places private sector makes the necessary financing arrangements and and speaking to what was on the floor, without getting into some assumes most of the risks in exchange for the right to acquire or diatribe about some future referendum in Quebec which has rent the facility and charge user fees. very little, if anything, to do with what we are supposed to be speaking to here today. My earlier comments were that I would It is quite clear that Canadians are also changing their opinion try to speak to the motion. on how we can modernize our infrastructure. According to a recent study by the Canadian Construction Association, for As to the member’s questions, I agree with him. I have heard example, close to 58 per cent of Canadians agree that we should the term plebiscite used in reference to the vote in Prince ask users of freeways to pay for the construction of a network Edward Island and I have heard the term referendum. I am sure which is financed by the private sector, instead of imposing a tax he knows some people believe that to be an argument of on gas or special levies. semantics, that the terms are interchangeable. There are others (1330) who would say no, there is a very real difference between a plebiscite and a referendum. One of the main reasons for this changing attitude is the alarming debt burden all levels of government are faced with as My colleagues and friends from Prince Edward Island most well as the disgust more and more Canadians feel towards their often referred to the vote that was taken as a plebiscite. It was 60 government, which keeps increasing taxes to finance costly to 40 in favour of this project in 1988. Frankly I think it is a megaprojects. Yet we must renovate our infrastructure, espe- political science or semantics argument. cially in the transportation, communication and energy areas, if we want to remain competitive on the world market. As to my disappointment that the member asked me about, no, I was very pleased to hear the Leader of Her Majesty’s Loyal That is why the principle behind letting the private sector Opposition rise in his place today saying he would support the finance and build much needed public facilities is becoming project. However, I heard Bloc members lecturing the minister more and more interesting. about anticipated objections from the Bloc. I was in the House and heard the minister’s statement. Not once did he make Although Canadians generally support this principle, they do reference to members of any particular political party and what have some legitimate concerns about joint participation of the their views might be. He simply invited support from all public and private sectors in infrastructure projects. The public members of the House and he hoped that he would not hear wants to be sure it will not be asked to bail out ill–conceived and particular objections raised. underfinanced projects. It wants to be sure that private contrac- tors will meet environmental standards. It wants to make sure We are a little tired on this side of these gratuitous lectures that the cost will not become prohibitive, once these facilities and irrelevant comments and that is the source of my disappoint- are put in the hands of the private sector. It wants to make sure ment. However, I am very pleased the Bloc has seen fit to that the decisions concerning co–operative projects are made

1371

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders openly, in the best interests of the public and not only of the to the technical quality of construction but also to the protection government’s friends. of the environment.

That is also why I am sure that this project will set new Given these facts, the Northumberland Straight bridge project standards in terms of public consultation and care for the is of particular interest at this time. During the development of environment. this project, public concerns were carefully considered. The go-ahead was given only after a very open and public review. I am especially pleased to notice that even if construction has The deal was signed only after financial soundness was ascer- already started, this crucial question will continue to be a central tained. concern for the promoter as well as for the federal and provincial regulatory agencies. Virtually all the risks associated with the construction and operation of the facility will be borne by the promoter. The fare The contractor will have to follow a very strict environmental structure and the appropriate fees will be carefully regulated management and protection plan. The project will be continual- through federal legislation. Our government is firmly com- ly monitored to ensure that it remains environment friendly. mitted to supporting the renewal of this country’s infrastructure both in terms of job creation and in terms of enhancing our long I fully support this project not only because it is a good thing, term efficiency and competitiveness. but also because it generates substantial economic activity as well as much needed jobs and, more important, it is environment friendly. The President of the Treasury Board, who is at the helm of our infrastructure program, publicly invited the private sector to Mr. Michel Guimond (Beauport—Montmorency—Or- take an active part in this initiative. With this new approach, I léans): Mr. Speaker, the House of Commons is being called on think that we have every reason to regard the fixed link project today to approve or reject a government motion to amend the as an excellent model of joint venture implementation and Constitution of Canada under section 43. public interest protection. This project has undergone an ex- tremely stringent and comprehensive environmental assess- This section enables the House of Commons and a particular ment. province to amend the Constitution on various points which, in my opinion, are very diversified and wide–ranging. It would have been interesting if the Canadian government and the Allow me, Mr. Speaker, to add a few words to what the provinces had found enabling procedures for Quebec when it minister said about how great the project is with regard to the wanted to endorse the 1982 Constitution Act through the Meech environment. Much has been written on this issue. For the best Lake Accord, in order to become an equal partner. part of the five years it took to develop the project, environmen- tal considerations have been the primary concern of both the During this speech, if I may, I would like to go back to the government and the promoter. Of course, this project has been Constitution, because that is what we are dealing with here, subjected to the most thorough environmental assessment ever despite the fact that the Prime Minister does not want to talk conducted on a project of this magnitude. In fact, 90 analyses about it any more. I would now like to raise some issues relating were carried out, as the minister pointed out this morning, of the to Bill C–110, that passed third reading in September 1993. impact the bridge will have on the environment. Ten thousand people from both sides of the strait were consulted, and the Some Islanders have been worried about the fixed or mobile discussions were very open and honest. The people have had link with Canada’s mainland for many years, ever since Prince many opportunities to speak on the requirements of the project Edward Island joined Confederation. Others prefer to keep the during the 90 or so public hearings that were held. island as it is and to lead quiet lives in the country of their ancestors.

(1335) Our fellow citizens in Prince Edward Island wanted a link with the mainland so badly that they decided a few years ago to The project meets all the technical and environmental re- settle this issue in a plebiscite. This plebiscite, held in January quirements. 1988, showed that a majority favoured the establishment of a fixed link between the Island and the mainland. Let me remind you, if I may, of the result of the last court (1340) challenge: the Federal Court concluded that the government’s environmental assessment process had been much more thor- No one in the government or the Official Opposition is against ough than required. the will of the population. But let us not forget that this will is as valid for the people of Prince Edward Island as it is for those I think that this project will be well received by the people for living on Vancouver Island, the Magdalen Islands and even whom it is so very important that we pay close attention not only Newfoundland, if bridge technology allowed it.

1372

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders Unfortunately, there are prerequisites to the implementation constant dollars, for the whole duration of the contract. From and development of megaprojects. Allow me to point out five that angle, no one can claim that the fixed link project is prerequisites I regard as essential. First, the projects must be self–financing. Can Canada afford to spend $21 million a year, carried out legally; second, we must have the necessary finan- this on top of what it is already paying for the ferry service? cial resources; third, the environment must be protected; fourth, this megaproject must benefit the population and help to create We are not opposed to the principle that Prince Edward Island jobs; finally, we must ensure that all Canadian citizens can be is entitled to a ferry service subsidized by all Canadian taxpay- treated the same way. ers. In fact, this commitment greatly facilitated things when PEI joined Confederation; it was an historic constitutional compro- I would like to see if the conditions I just listed are met by this mise. project. We do not oppose the fact that the federal government As far as legality is concerned, as I was saying at the continues to fully respect this constitutional right, although I beginning of my speech, part of the population, in a plebiscite, must point out that this same government was not as generous in authorized the Prince Edward Island provincial government to the past when dealing with Quebec’s historic constitutional go ahead with the project. But the other side, brought together in rights. Remember what Mr. Trudeau did in 1982. It is because of the Friends of the Island Coalition, strongly objected to this episodes like this one that Quebec is irreversibly headed for project for different reasons. First, the dangers for the lobster sovereignty. and scallop fishery, migratory birds, the environment and the Islanders’ tranquillity. (1345) We must not dismiss this group which opposes this project. It applied to the Federal Court, which issued an order requiring the Moving on to environmental concerns, in spite of all the Minister of Public Works to conduct an environmental assess- studies conducted and the approval obtained from both the trial ment pursuant to section 12 of the Order in Council in relation to and appellate divisions of the Federal Court, there is no question the developer’s detailed construction plan, before making any that during construction and most likely afterward, the lobster final decisions which may have irreversible environmental and scallop fisheries will be disrupted because of the underwater consequences. movements resulting from the construction of a fixed link. The proof is that plans have been made to set aside $10 million every On April 22, 1993, the specific environmental assessment year to compensate the 240 fishermen affected by the construc- prepared by Jacques Whitford Environment Consultants for tion of the bridge. We are only talking here about the construc- Strait Crossing Inc., at Ottawa’s request, was presented. tion phase. What will happen to the fishery once the fixed link is in operation? Will the government have to continue paying the Although this study shows that this project is not harmful to $10 million in compensation? Are the fishermen supposed to the environment, as we agree, the Friends of the Island do not rely on unemployment insurance to get by? Will they be joining accept the decision and have appealed. The Court of Appeal the growing ranks of unemployed fishermen throughout the upheld the lower court’s decision, which apparently means that Maritimes and Quebec? the project is now legal, but we must raise questions about its morality. The opponents will watch everything the developers I would now like to examine the issue of job creation and the do as they carry out the project. benefits to be derived from this megaproject by the residents of Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick. During the construc- Now let us talk about the financial resources. A few weeks tion phase, more than $1 billion will be invested and normally, ago, Canada’s national debt passed the $500 billion mark, not this should result in the creation of temporary jobs and bring counting provincial and municipal debt. I will be very brief in about some semblance of prosperity. my financial evaluation. The federal government now pays Marine Atlantic around $21 million a year for the cost of the Initially, the project backer will have to bring in workers from ferry service between Prince Edward Island and the mainland. across North America. This is the case with of all megaprojects. The ferry service is adequate and fits in with the local environ- Since this is a pan–Canadian venture, we are counting on ment very well. Quebec construction workers to figure prominently in bridge construction activities. Quebec workers—and there are many of Several years ago, the federal government announced that it them in my riding of Beauport—Montmorency—Orléans—are was considering building a fixed link under one main condition: known for their skills and willingness to work on megaprojects. that the costs not exceed the price of the ferry service for the Need we remind people that Quebecers worked on some of the same period. Yet, the federal government is about to give to the largest hydroelectric projects in North America, if not the entire private sector an annual subsidy of $42 million, in 1992 dollars, world. I am confident that initially, the unemployment rates in for the construction and management of the bridge, over a both provinces affected will decline substantially. However, the period of 35 years. This represents close to $1.47 billion, in question we need to ask is this: Does the Government of Canada

1373

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders and do the residents of Prince Edward Island and New Bruns- them the same treatment? We do not have to amend the Constitu- wick want temporary jobs? tion to have an ultra high speed train in the Quebec–Windsor corridor. One could say the same about giving the Magdalen The municipal infrastructure program provides for the cre- Islands a new ferry from MIL Davie Shipyards in Lévis. When ation of temporary jobs across Canada, including the two these items are tabled in the House, we should be as open– provinces just mentioned, the aim being to get the economy minded as we are today about the bridge between Prince Edward going again. However, we cannot continue to let people dream, Island and New Brunswick, and our decisions should always be and then leave them to fend for themselves when the temporary based on the five principles I just described. jobs end. Creating temporary jobs causes no great harm, but eliminating permanent jobs is downright criminal. I want to say that this House should always be very circum- spect when deciding how taxpayers’ money will be spent. I am convinced that partisan considerations are inappropriate when Currently Marine Atlantic employs 420 persons on a perma- discussing projects that will be part of our legacy to future nent basis. These jobs have been around since 1917. Upon generations. completion of the bridge over the Northumberland Strait, there will be a net loss of 360 permanent jobs. The company will need As the Official Leader of the Opposition said this morning, only 60 people to operate the bridge. Of course this does not the House of Commons should take into account the democratic include all the jobs lost in the shipyards in the Maritimes and choices made by people in a plebiscite or a referendum. Quebec, including MIL Davie in Lauzon, which builds and repairs the ferries that connect Prince Edward Island with the In concluding, I would like to say the Bloc Quebecois is continent. What are we going to do with these 360 people? always glad to talk about the Constitution. Negotiate allowances? Invest in skills upgrading and relocation allowances, if necessary? That is a problem we will have to Mr. Ronald J. Duhamel (Parliamentary Secretary to Min- consider when we vote on this motion. ister of Public Works and Government Services): Mr. Speak- er, I wanted to thank my colleague for his speech. I have three I mentioned the loss of 360 jobs, but I did not mention the questions to ask. potential loss to the communities in Borden and Cape Tormen- tine which will see a significant drop in economic activity. A If I understood correctly, my colleague was saying that it was special development fund of up to $20 million will be created to a bad deal. Taking the $40 million or so which the ferries now help them. However, $20 million can provide relief only for a cost and using that amount to build a bridge over a 35–year limited period of time. Then what will happen to these people? period and then not having any subsidy to pay afterward was a And this amount adds to government spending. bad deal. That is what I understood. Let him correct me if I misunderstood; that is why I am asking the question.

A final criterion: fair treatment of all Canadians. As I see it, He also talked about ‘‘temporary jobs’’. Of course, when you we have a mandate to be fair to the people we represent. build a bridge, work begins and then it is over. The jobs will not Although the construction of this fixed link is financed partly by continue once the project is complete. But is it not true that there the private sector, the Government of Canada is committed to is still a possibility, a great possibility, I would add, of creating paying an annual contribution of $41.9 million in 1992 dollars, jobs in tourism, increasing trade and so on? Did my colleague indexed for a period of 35 years, which, as I mentioned before, forget to mention these jobs that no doubt will be created or does works out to a total of $1.47 billion. he believe that no other jobs will be created because of this new bridge? (1350) Finally, I find it interesting that my colleague, who in a way attacked the project, also said, ‘‘Let us be open–minded, be- This subsidy enabled Strait Crossing Finance Inc. to obtain cause when other projects come up, like one for the Magdalen financing through a private bond issue worth $660 million. The Islands or others that might benefit Quebec, we should be bonds have a triple–A rating, the best guarantee that can be generous’’. Listen, I want to be generous with you, but I would given to the banks. Furthermore, the government agrees not to like you to be generous in this case too. retain from the subsidy money owing from debtor companies in the case of tax default, for instance, so that potential investors Mr. Guimond: Mr. Speaker, I would like to tell the member enjoy the same guarantees they would have in the case of for St. Boniface that I noted the three points. In the first one, he government bonds. says that apparently I find it is a bad deal. I do not know if you were here at the beginning of my speech. Once again, I would like hon. members to remember when they vote on this motion, that we were sent here by our Mr. Duhamel: I was here and I listened. constituents to ensure all citizens are treated fairly. If other provinces have a similar request, are we in a position to give Mr. Guimond: You were? Great.

1374

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

S. O. 31 I said that I stand with my party; we are for the project, but always characterized our party and I believe it will still be the I simply said that when it comes to megaprojects, we must be case in the future. cautious and take some principles or prerequisites into account. If I am not mistaken, my colleague said he was in favour of the I referred to the questioning and the whole process that had project, and so is his party, but he also pointed out that Friends been followed before. I mentioned the environmental concerns of the Island had some concerns about possible environmental of Friends of the Earth and others. impacts. (1355) Does my colleague think that these concerns are so serious— of course we will be careful but just the same—as to warrant In conclusion, I am not against the project; I do not say that it stopping the project? Has enough been done so far, with 90 is a bad deal. All I am saying is that we must be cautious about analyses and the 80–odd meetings? Is there enough evidence to investing 1.47 billion in 1992 dollars in a difficult period like allow us to proceed with the project with some assurance that it this. It is simply a message of caution that I was getting across. I will go well, that it is not too risky? am not against the project and neither is my party nor was my leader this morning. Mr. Guimond: Mr. Speaker, the answer is no, the project must not be stopped, it must go forward. I think that our stand is About the temporary jobs, it is the same reasoning as for the clear on that. On the other hand, if the project has no impact on present infrastructure program. Once the street is paved or the local lobster and scallop fishermen, why did the government sidewalk is built, there is nothing more to do. The street will not feel the need to compensate them? This would mean that be repaved for years. compensation is paid for nothing. I am not saying that the concerns of the group were futile, just What I said is that once the bridge is built, only 60 permanent this: even if its action was dismissed by the courts, the group jobs will be created to operate the bridge and the jobs of the 360 will have to keep a watchful eye on things to make sure that the ferry workers will be lost. You mention tourism development on project will be as environment friendly in reality as studies Prince Edward Island and I agree with you that it— claimed it will be. That is the point I was making about the environment. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Kilger): I would just like to remind the hon. member and all our colleagues in the House to (1400 ) avoid addressing one another directly and to go through the [English] Chair, please. The Speaker: Order. It being two o’clock p.m., pursuant to Mr. Guimond: Mr. Speaker, I was in full oratorical flight, Standing Order 30(5), the House will now proceed to statements since I am a passionate man, but you are right to call me to order. by members.

Yes, we agree that tourism will develop on Prince Edward ______Island as a result. The question is, given that it is an island, is the tourism structure limited by geography? I agree with the hon. member that there will be development, no argument on that STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS point, but I was talking about the temporary jobs building the bridge. [English]

As for open–mindedness, I am sure that my colleague under- TEACHING EXCELLENCEIN SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY stood what I meant. When the time comes to discuss in this AND MATHEMATICS House or in committee the need for a high speed train between Mr. Larry McCormick (Hastings—Frontenac—Lennox Quebec City and Windsor and to give the MIL Davie shipyard and Addington): Mr. Speaker, this morning the recipients of the the contract to the Magdalen Island ferry, which will maintain Prime Minister’s Award for Teaching Excellence in Science, 10,000 direct and indirect jobs in the Quebec City region—we Technology and Mathematics were honoured. The 17 recipients, are talking about maintaining jobs. It is important to create jobs, coming from all parts of Canada, are all exceptional teachers. but it is also important to maintain them. The Official Opposi- They have formulated and put into practice innovative teaching tion has shown that it is not narrow minded. It has shown methods. openness and I am sure that hon. members opposite will show the same openness when the time comes to discuss the two In my riding, Mr. Richard Hopkins, a teacher at Napanee issues that I mentioned, the high speed train and the ferry. District Secondary School, is cited for creating an applied science and technology program which responds to local com- Mr. Ronald J. Duhamel (Parliamentary Secretary to Min- munity needs. The students gain invaluable practical experi- ister of Public Works and Government Services): Just a point ence. There can be no greater testimony to Mr. Hopkins’ ability of clarification, Mr. Speaker. I think that you can count on the than the fact that it was his students who nominated him for the Liberal Party to be very open minded. Open mindedness has award.

1375

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

S. O. 31 I note that the award winners are presently in Ottawa. I ask the The qualification for winning this award is that a teacher must House to join me today in congratulating all 17 worthy recipi- have shown a major impact on student performance and interest ents of this national award. in science, technology and mathematics. Mr. Loree developed the Science Can! Foundation. Over 10,000 students in three * * * provinces have participated in this highly successful organiza- tion. Mr. Keith Clark led teachers in developing the grade nine QUEBEC SOVEREIGNTY destreamed science curriculum. Mr. Jean H. Leroux (Shefford): Mr. Speaker, in yesterday’s Encouraging the interest and participation of students in the Montreal Gazette, one could read ‘‘Anglo–Catholics demoral- fields of mathematics, science and technology is critical to ized by Bloc victory’’. On behalf of my party, the Bloc Quebe- ensuring that Canada will be able to continue to compete in the cois, I would like to reassure my fellow anglo–Quebecers. We 21st century. have been elected by the people of Quebec to promote and I am certain that the hon. member for Oakville—Milton, the prepare the sovereignty of Quebec. Perhaps now is the right time hon. member for Halton—Peel and the rest of the Government for the English speaking of Quebec to join us, to get more of Canada members join me in congratulating Robert Loree and involved in the preparation of Quebec’s future. Keith Clark and the rest of the recipients of this terrific award. Let us look forward together. Doing this would make the process of change easier for us and the rest of Canada, hopefully * * * side by side in harmony as partners in a new deal. ACADEMY AWARDS * * * Mr. John Cannis (Scarborough Centre): Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage, I RECALL LEGISLATION would like to bring to the attention of the House that last week Mr. Randy White (Fraser Valley West): Mr. Speaker, many the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences announced people in the riding of Markham—Whitchurch—Stouffville the nominations for this year’s Academy Awards ceremony to be have expressed the desire to initiate recall proceedings to held in Los Angeles on March 21. replace their elected member of Parliament. Once again the excellence of Canadian film making was The majority of people in my riding of Fraser Valley West recognized with the nomination of two highly regarded projects. want recall legislation to ensure that I and those who follow in The first, ‘‘The Mighty River’’, directed by Frédéric Back and my footsteps are held accountable. produced by Hubert Tison at the Société Radio–Canada, was nominated as Best Animated Short Film. My colleague from Beaver River, Alberta, has twice sub- mitted a recall bill because neither the Liberal nor the Conserva- The second, ‘‘The Broadcast Tapes of Doctor Peter’’, pro- tive governments want to be held accountable to those who elect duced by David Papernay and Arthur Ginsberg at the Canadian them. Broadcasting Corporation in Vancouver, was nominated as Best Feature–Length Documentary Film. It is time that the 295 people in this House acknowledge the wishes of the vast numbers we represent and provide them with I would like to congratulate our nominees and recognize the the rights they deserve and the accountability we require. quality and dedication of our public broadcasters. They deserve our continued support. Let us all together acknowledge the need to represent Cana- dians to the best of our ability and the right of Canadians to * * * recall us if we do not. Let us all commit to recall. (1405 ) * * * MULTICULTURAL WEEK TEACHING EXCELLENCEIN SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY Mrs. Anna Terrana (Vancouver East): Mr. Speaker, this AND MATHEMATICS week in we celebrate multicultural week. Ms. Paddy Torsney (Burlington): Mr. Speaker, two exem- Multicultural week started in 1984 to celebrate our cultures and plary teachers from the Halton Board of Education were ho- traditions. In British Columbia, where multiculturalism has noured with the Prime Minister’s Award for Teaching played such an important role, all people come together to share Excellence in Science, Technology and Mathematics. and understand each other. Cross–cultural education has de- stroyed many barriers and is helping in the fight against racism. I extend my congratulations to Mr. Robert Loree and Mr. Multiculturalism teaches us about people and helps us all Keith Clark. understand and appreciate each other.

1376

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

S. O. 31 Lectures, meetings and cross–cultural events will take place On behalf of all of the residents of Calgary Southeast I send during the week, giving all people a chance to dismiss our biases our encouragement, admiration and affection. and myths and to immerse in a wonderful world of differences and similarities. Go get them, Michelle. Multiculturalism applies to all of us. We all have a culture, we * * * all have ethnicity. Let us all celebrate in the spirit of understand- [Translation] ing that permeates this week–long event and that will unite all people in British Columbia. CANADA SCHOLARSHIPS Happy multicultural week to our British Columbians and a Mr. (Outremont): Mr. Speaker, on Friday, vote of thanks to all those who have spent hours of volunteer February 11, I had the honour of representing the government in work to promote and keep all cultures of Canada alive. my riding of Outremont at a ceremony where 97 students from the University of Montreal received awards from the Canada * * * Scholarships Program. These scholarships are awarded to stu- [Translation] dents who excel in science and engineering. During this ceremo- ny I was able to witness the attachment of many of them not only BISHOP WILLY ROMÉLUS to their province, but also to Canada. After the ceremony, one of the students asked me why the scholarships were taxable. They Mr. Roger Pomerleau (Anjou—Rivière–des–Prairies): Mr. felt the government was giving with one hand and taking back Speaker, I wish to bring to the attention of this House that His with the other. Lordship Willy Romélus, Bishop of Jérémie, in Haiti, was recently recommended for a Nobel Peace Prize nomination by I draw the attention of the ministers responsible to that, Professor Roberto Miguelez, of the University of Ottawa, and because these hard–working students are the bearers of the that since that time, many organizations have also supported his values of excellence we seek to promote. They will be the nomination. leaders of tomorrow, and we should give them all the help we can give. Canada Scholarships are certainly a good program but It is worth recalling that for several years already and at the if we do not tax lottery prizes, should we tax scholarships? risk of his life, on which attempts have been made many times, Bishop Romélus has been leading the fight for the liberation of * * * the Haitian people. As early as February 1984, Bishop Romélus was calling for internationally supervised elections in that [English] country and on February 22, 1993, he received the Governor General of Canada Medal. JOB TRAINING In view of that, Bloc Quebecois members have decided to Mr. Tony Valeri (Lincoln): Mr. Speaker, a key issue in the support his nomination and are hoping that many other members Liberal campaign platform is getting Canadians back to work. will follow. One way this will occur is by strenghthening and assisting the small and medium–size business sectors. * * * We all know of small businesses that have had difficulty [English] obtaining proper financing. The Canadian Federation of Inde- pendent Business makes the point that equity markets are biased MICHELLE MORTON toward large firms. The only way to relieve the equity problem of small firms is to create incentives for Canadians to invest Mrs. Jan Brown (Calgary Southeast): Mr. Speaker, I rise in their savings in private businesses to create wealth and jobs in the House today to recognize an outstanding Canadian athlete, local communities across the country. one who lives in my riding of Calgary Southeast. Michelle Morton is a speed skater competing in Lillehammer this week as (1410 ) part of our Canadian Olympic team. With so many Canadians facing retraining, the government Michelle embodies the spirit of what we are all about as must begin to acknowledge that informal training provided by Canadians. Great hopes coupled with hard work have achieved small and medium–sized businesses is a critical dimension to results which for her were not completely expected. Michelle the retraining taking place. The government must develop has recurring attacks of asthma and it is her focus and deter- training initiatives which support small businesses involved in mination that now place her as a powerful member on the retraining in the informal setting. Canadian roster. Our public funding of skills development should focus on Her persistence as a competent athlete at both the provincial literacy and generic skills. Maximum autonomy should be and national levels demonstrates that obstacles can be overcome placed at the local community level to determine training needs in the pursuit of a dream and we are proud of that achievement. and outcomes.

1377

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

S. O. 31 If any of these recommendations are adopted it would help half a cent yesterday, continuing a rapid decline which started spur a recovery in the small and medium–sized business sectors after the last election. and assist in the recovery of the Canadian economy. This is, after all, what Canadians have asked for. Since the end of October 1993 the dollar has lost more than two and a half cents, raising the cost of imports and increasing * * * the risk of rapidly escalating interest rates in the near future. The Minister of Finance has not publicly set a target level for OLYMPIC WINTER GAMES either the dollar or interest rate levels. I urge him to do so as Mr. Jesse Flis (Parkdale—High Park): Mr. Speaker, in a soon as possible so that Canadian businesses and citizens can world rife with conflict it is easy to overlook the fact that the make plans for future spending. Olympic games were created for the purpose of gathering The minister must be aware that upward pressure on the cost nations together under a banner of peace. The five rings of the of living will result from the decline of the dollar. I hope that he Olympic flag symbolize the joining of all five continents in the is not trying to inflate his way out of an impending debt crisis spirit of athletic competition. rather than take positive action to reduce government spending. Despite the bitter war in former Yugoslavia, hope for peace in The message from the people of Canada is clear. Cut out entire now rests in Lillehammer, Norway. segments of government and grants to special interest groups I am therefore very proud of one of my constituents from rather than raise taxes or permit a major decline in the Canadian Parkdale—High Park who is representing Canada at the 17th dollar. Olympic Winter Games. Kennedy Ryan will compete in free– style skiing in which she will join young athletes from around * * * the world. TEACHING EXCELLENCEIN SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY Let us not overlook the spirit of the games. I congratulate the AND MATHEMATICS Ryan family and friends who are just as proud as I am of all of our Canadian Olympic athletes. Mr. Ovid L. Jackson (Bruce—Grey): Mr. Speaker, I rise to bring to the attention of the House and to give our congratula- * * * tions to the 17 national level winners of the Prime Minister’s Award for Teaching Excellence in Science, Technology and [Translation] Mathematics. CHILE I would especially like to mention Mr. Douglas H. Cunning- ham of Bruce Peninsula District High School in Lion’s Head, a Mr. Osvaldo Nunez (Bourassa): Mr. Speaker, as you know, I village in my riding of Bruce—Grey. He is a recipient of the am a Quebecer born in Chile, a country I love with all my heart, award at the local level. and which lived under a long military dictatorship until 1989, when Patricio Aylwin was democratically elected president. Mr. Cunningham is an example of excellence and enthusiasm in instilling in our youth those skills critical to the future of a His mandate will end on March 11 when he will be replaced by healthy Canada. Eduardo Frei, who was elected last December. I know that the Bruce Peninsula District High School in Every nation in the world has been invited to send a delega- Lion’s Head is known for the outstanding students it produces, tion to the ceremonies marking this handing over of office. More especially in the field of science. The people of Bruce—Grey than 20 heads of state have already confirmed that they will riding salute Mr. Cunningham for his outstanding contribution. attend this major event. I know that members of this House will join with me in Chile is particularly important for Quebec and Canada. recognizing and congratulating, on behalf of all Canadians, all It is therefore desirable for Canada to send a ministerial the winners of this well deserved award. delegation to represent our country on March 11. I strongly urge the government to do so. * * * [Translation] * * * [English] WINTER OLYMPICS

THE ECONOMY Ms. Albina Guarnieri (Mississauga East): Mr. Speaker, a great sense of pride filled the heart of all Canadians, on the day Mr. Ted White (North Vancouver): Mr. Speaker, I am before yesterday, when Edi Podivinsky won the bronze medal in disturbed to note that the Canadian dollar dropped by more than men’s downhill skiing in Kvitfjell, Norway.

1378

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Oral Questions [English] I also wonder how we can reconcile the minister’s answer with what was said by the person who appeared on television last Edi is only the second Canadian to win an Olympic men’s night and claimed to have been an eye witness to the facts I just skiing medal. His achievement is matched only by Steve Pod- reported. borski’s result in the men’s downhill at the 1980 Lake Placid Winter Olympics. To achieve excellence in his event Edi Podi- The Prime Minister says: Name names. Who, who? Well I can vinsky had to overcome the pain of injury and adversity. He is an name Minister Claude Ryan of the Quebec government who, for athlete with the determination to meet every challenge. many years, was responsible for the Sûreté du Québec and who Sport is at the heart of the Canadian identity. It gives said yesterday he had known for years that organized crime and Canadians a sense of pride, mutual respect and confidence in our the warriors were working together. Perhaps the RCMP should ability to succeed. talk to the Sûreté du Québec or the Solicitor General could talk to his Quebec counterparts. In the spirit of our rich sporting heritage the Canadian government is proud to be a partner in building sport for the Once again, my question to the Solicitor General is this: future and in supporting the development of our heroes such as Could he tell the House who in the federal government, at the Edi Podivinsky. political level or otherwise, ordered the cancellation of a major police operation planned last December by the RCMP and the [Translation] Drug Enforcement Agency on reserve territory? Who cancelled On behalf of all members I would like to congratulate Edi the operation? There was a government here last December. Podivinsky for his remarkable achievement. Hon. (Leader of the Government in the House ______of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada): Mr. Speaker, of course I cannot comment on the RCMP’s operations. Does the Leader of the Bloc Quebecois want to jeopardize the outcome of ORAL QUESTION PERIOD these investigations with his questions? I wonder why he is asking me these questions today. [Translation] Hon. Lucien Bouchard (Leader of the Opposition): The ORGANIZED CRIME Leader of the Opposition is merely transmitting questions that are being asked all over Canada, questions that are reflected on Hon. Lucien Bouchard (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. television and in reports in the newspapers. It is a very legiti- Speaker, last night on Le Point, Radio–Canada broadcast a mate question. We have a right to know. Canadian and Quebec report from a smuggler which confirms there are close ties voters have a right to know whether the law is being observed between the warriors and organized crime in Montreal. and whether there are in this country certain ‘‘no go’’ zones for In another article published today by journalist Michel Vastel, law enforcement. And the Solicitor General has a duty to answer we read that last autumn, the RCMP cancelled two police these questions. operations that were to take place on a Mohawk reserve near Montreal. (1420) Could the Solicitor General or the Prime Minister inform the Which reminds me, I have another question which is even House whether they obtained answers from the RCMP to the more specific: Could he confirm the allegations published in questions I asked yesterday about warriors involvement in today’s newspapers that the chief of the squad in charge of certain criminal activities of organized crime in Montreal? anti–drug operations at the RCMP prevented his officers from going on reserve territory to pursue surveillance operations and Hon. Herb Gray (Leader of the Government in the House make arrests? of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada): Mr. Speaker, I discussed the matter with the Commissioner of the RCMP this Hon. Herb Gray (Leader of the Government in the House morning. He informed me that the RCMP enforces the law of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada): Mr. Speaker, I throughout the country and that it had no knowledge of a drug can assure the Leader of the Bloc populaire, excuse me, the Bloc warehouse on an aboriginal reserve in the Montreal area. Quebecois—it is not very popular right now— I may add that we must take very seriously the information I was given by the RCMP commissioner, who is one of the world’s Some hon. members: Very popular! leading police officials. Mr. Gray: Thus, I can assure the leader of the Bloc Quebecois Hon. Lucien Bouchard (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. that there are no ‘‘no go’’ zones in this country, including Speaker, with all due respect for the work of the RCMP, one aboriginal reserves. I cannot confirm the allegations made in the nevertheless wonders how the RCMP could be expected to know article by Mr. Vastel which appeared today, but I repeat that the what is happening down there if it does not go there. government intends to ensure that people obey the law across

1379

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Oral Questions this country. And I hope I can count on the Leader of the would express support for the efforts we are taking which go far Opposition to fully support our policy in this respect. beyond what was the case when the Leader of the Opposition was on this side of the House as a member of the Conservative Mr. Michel Gauthier (Roberval): Mr. Speaker, given the cabinet. statements made yesterday by the former Quebec Minister of Public Security, it is clear that the only person in Canada not to * * * know that the RCMP and the Sûreté will not take action on Mohawk land is the Solicitor General of Canada. GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES Both he and the Prime Minister told us during the course of a Mr. (Calgary Southwest): Mr. Speaker, debate that the situation was extremely delicate and that caution my question is for the Prime Minister. had to be exercised. Why does he maintain that the RCMP can take action on Mohawk land without any problem whatsoever, As new members we have now sat through numerous govern- considering that even the Prime Minister stressed the delicate ment briefings in which we have been presented with depart- nature of the situation several days ago? mental and program mission statements, mandate statements and statements of objective. We notice that very few of these [English] statements contain any reference to the serious financial posi- tion of the government or the interests of taxpayers. Hon. Herb Gray (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada): Mr. Speaker, I (1425) want to say again that under this government there are no no–go Would the Prime Minister, this week, direct all departmental zones. program and agency heads to revise their mission statements to include deficit reduction and maximizing benefits to taxpayers I do not know what the situation was when the Leader of the as explicit goals of every department, program and agency of the Opposition was in the Conservative cabinet. He may want to tell Government of Canada? us himself, but I can say there are no no–go zones right now. It is the intention of this government to have the law enforced Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister): Mr. Speaker, if everywhere in the country. Just because we do not see mounted I were to do it this week I would be late. I did it the first day I police on television does not mean they are not at work on the formed the government. reserves or anywhere in Canada where there is work to be done to enforce the law. Some hon. members: Hear, hear.

[Translation] Mr. Chrétien (Saint–Maurice): I will ask the ministers to make sure they run a lean, effective government and to make Mr. Michel Gauthier (Roberval): Mr. Speaker, since RCMP sure taxpayers are getting service for the tax dollars they pay. authorities have confirmed that in addition to cigarettes, smug- Mr. Preston Manning (Calgary Southwest): Mr. Speaker, I gling networks deal in luxury items such as clothing, jewellery have a supplementary question for the Prime Minister. and alcohol, how can the Solicitor General expect us to believe that these networks would not be used to deal in the most As the Prime Minister knows, over 70 per cent of the net lucrative item of all, namely cocaine? expenditures of the government are statutory expenditures and not voted on annually by the House. [English] Would the Prime Minister consent to bring the review of Hon. Herb Gray (Leader of the Government in the House statutory spending within the purview of the House and its of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada): Mr. Speaker, committees on an annual basis? the opposition must have been in a dream world Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister): Mr. Speaker, the last week or so. If he had not been, he would have heard the the hon. leader of the Reform Party will know that there will be leader of our party, the Prime Minister, and myself saying that budget bills in front of the House and that he will be able to the reason we have to act immediately after years of neglect, present amendments. If he wants to reduce old age pensions of including the period when the Leader of the Opposition was in course we will vote against it. the Conservative cabinet, was that there were smuggling net- works involved not only with tobacco but with alcohol, drugs Mr. Preston Manning (Calgary Southwest): Mr. Speaker, I and high powered military weapons. have a further supplementary question. Perhaps we will get further this time. We said that right in this House. That is why we have enhanced enforcement efforts all over the country. Rather than The Auditor General points out that federal revenues from this type of approach by the Official Opposition, I would think it user fees, from government facilities, services and goods exceed

1380

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Oral Questions

$3 billion annually but that these fees are not subject to (1430) regulatory review or parliamentary scrutiny. In closing may I remind my hon. friend that the vote last year Would the Prime Minister direct the Treasury Board to on the private member’s bill was taken in the shadow of the provide Parliament with a government–wide summary of user judgment of the in the Rodriguez fees being charged, the revenues raised and the authorities under case. Many members felt it was best to await the outcome of the which they are established? court’s determination before having Parliament act. We now have the judgment in that case. We know that the judges feel it is Hon. Arthur C. Eggleton (President of the Treasury Board our responsibility and we intend to discharge it. and Minister responsible for Infrastructure): Mr. Speaker, revenue information is provided in various levels of detail both [Translation] in the public accounts which have now been filed with the House Mrs. Pierrette Venne (Saint–Hubert): Mr. Speaker, does the as well as in part III of the estimates. minister not recognize that it is pointless to hold yet another We certainly want to be in a position to provide whatever debate if it does not result in legislation, especially since the information we can to be helpful to parliamentarians. We are Supreme Court has concluded that Parliament must settle the reviewing the whole matter with respect to what improvements issue one way or another, not just talk about it? could be made in presentation and disclosure in that connection [English] and to determine the appropriate information that would be helpful to members. Hon. (Minister of Justice and Attorney Gener- al of Canada): Mr. Speaker, I can assure the hon. member that I will be writing to parliamentary committees to seek their we will find a way to put the question before the House so it is advice on what types of information with respect to user fees not academic. It will be meaningful. If it involves a proposal for they would find useful in their deliberations. change in legislation with a free vote then that is exactly what we will do. * * * * * * [Translation] GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES EUTHANASIA Mr. Charlie Penson (Peace River): Mr. Speaker, my ques- Mrs. Pierrette Venne (Saint–Hubert): Mr. Speaker, in 1991, tion is for the Minister of National Defence. the Conservative government introduced Bill C–261 on eutha- In 1983 four household moving van lines were convicted of nasia and cessation of treatment, which was later dropped from price fixing and are now under a prohibition order, of which I the Order Paper. A private member’s motion on the subject was have a copy. Yet only these four van lines can bid on the debated in March 1993, and the House rejected this motion. department’s moving business, from which 900 other moving Instead of having a debate of no consequence on the issue, companies are effectively excluded. will the government table a bill to decriminalize, under certain Can the minister provide a statement of whether its present circumstances and conditions, the act of assisting the terminally government tendering practice is contrary to the letter or the ill to put an end to their suffering? spirit of the prohibition order or in fact may be illegal? [English] Hon. David Michael Collenette (Minister of National De- fence and Minister of Veterans Affairs): Mr. Speaker, certain- Hon. Allan Rock (Minister of Justice and Attorney Gener- ly I have no knowledge of any action the department is involved al of Canada): Mr. Speaker, the government intends to provide in that is illegal. I am sure it is not the case. through Parliament a forum for informed discussion of the important and complex issues this subject raises. I answered a similar question from my colleague from Water- loo a few weeks ago. The matter is being looked into and I will At a time that we will announce and by means that we will get back to the House at the earliest opportunity. At the moment develop through discussion in caucus and cabinet, we will it is somewhat premature to comment any further. furnish to the House an opportunity to explore the public policy questions that arise, and likely in a free vote an opportunity will Mr. Charlie Penson (Peace River): Mr. Speaker, a supple- be afforded for each member of Parliament to express her or his mentary question for the minister. I am still waiting for the view on these questions. The matter will come forward to this answer to a question from two weeks ago. In the meantime the House in an informed way so that the issues around this terribly government tender closed on February 12 for this year’s moving difficult but important subject can be addressed. business.

1381

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Oral Questions Can the minister assure us that these tender bids will be open resources development not only does not help but may actually to public scrutiny when they are opened? hurt their chances of getting a job. Hon. David Michael Collenette (Minister of National De- My question is for the Minister of Human Resources Develop- fence and Minister of Veterans Affairs): Mr. Speaker, under ment. Will the minister table the human resources development the arrangement we have with the company involved, any document that was quoted in the ‘‘Venture’’ program and call for changes to the regime have to be made by July of the previous an immediate free debate on the future of job training in year. The former government did not make that change. We have Canada? until July 31 of this year to address the situation. I assure the Hon. (Minister of Human Resources hon. member we will address it. Development and Minister of Western Economic Diversifi- cation): Mr. Speaker, I am not sure where the hon. member has * * * been but a week or so ago the House had three days of debate on [Translation] the whole issue of employment, training and social security. I would suggest he start reading his news clippings and TAINTED BLOOD Hansard so he can be up to date on what Parliament is doing before he asks a question. Mrs. Pauline Picard (Drummond): Mr. Speaker, my ques- tion is for the Minister of Health. The inquiry on the tainted Mr. Monte Solberg (Medicine Hat): Mr. Speaker, I am sure blood scandal started its hearings yesterday in Toronto. We the Canadian people will appreciate that answer. found out that the victims only had until March 15 to accept a compensation settlement and to abandon any legal claims. The By the time the review of social programs is complete the victims who do not sign this agreement would not receive any government will have spent over $1.5 billion on what, according compensation. to the minister’s department, is useless training. So as not to waste the time of the unemployed or taxpayers’ money, will the Does the minister recognize that this is shameless blackmail, minister tell us what steps he is taking to ensure this problem is a real holdup unworthy of a civilized society? addressed immediately? Hon. (Minister of Health): I should explain, Hon. Lloyd Axworthy (Minister of Human Resources Mr. Speaker, that the March 15 deadline was set by the provinces Development and Minister of Western Economic Diversifi- for a provincial program that was accepted by the provinces and cation): Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to report to the House that not for a federal program. yesterday we had a meeting of all the provincial ministers of employment, labour market training and social services, as well Mrs. Pauline Picard (Drummond): Mr. Speaker, will the as those from the territories. We discussed a number of issues. minister make a commitment, in the name of compassion and decency, to pay interim compensation without asking the vic- One of the things we agreed on was that we take immediate tims to abandon any legal claims? steps to end duplication of services, to look at where there are cost overruns, where we can begin to rationalize programs like [English] training in order to save money and get better delivery of services. Hon. Diane Marleau (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, Justice Krever was commissioned to review the safety of the The hon. member should be very happy we have now been Canadian blood system and to make recommendations on how it able to achieve full scale co–operation of all the provinces, can be made even safer. I fully support the inquiry and will do territories and the federal government toward the objective of everything to ensure its success. achieving better training and employment for all Canadians.

In reply to the hon. member’s question, I say again that the * * * March 15 date is part of a provincial program to help the victims of tainted blood. Perhaps she could direct her questions to [Translation] another level of government. TAINTED BLOOD * * * Mr. Pierre de Savoye (Portneuf): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health. As soon as the inquiry on the (1435 ) tainted blood scandal opened yesterday in Toronto, Justice Krever asked that the mandate of this inquiry be extended by one JOB TRAINING year, given the complexity of this case. Mr. Monte Solberg (Medicine Hat): Mr. Speaker, recently Does the minister share the opinion expressed by Justice on the TV program ‘‘Venture’’ it was revealed that the type of Krever and, as a result, will she extend the mandate of the training unemployed Canadians are getting through human inquiry so that it can shed light on the whole complex issue?

1382

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Oral Questions Hon. Diane Marleau (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, as I sustainable options for reductions of greenhouse emissions by said earlier, I am quite concerned about this. We must reassure the year 2005. Canadians that their blood bank is safe. Yes, Justice Krever asked for a little more time and we will consider his request, but It is my expectation that the joint committee will report in we are also anxious to see his report. So we will try to give him November 1994. I am sure at that point the government will be the answers he wants in order to get the results that Canadians developing further working plans in relation to our commit- need. ments. Mr. Pierre de Savoye (Portneuf): Mr. Speaker, I am sure the * * * minister is aware that rushing the testimony would reduce the extent of this inquiry. As a result, and for the sake of consisten- THE BUDGET cy, does the minister not agree that the Canadian Hemophilia Mr. Herb Grubel (Capilano—Howe Sound): Mr. Speaker, Society and the commission should be given the money they my question is for the Minister of Finance. need to clear up this whole scandal? The minister stated in the House that in the next budget he will [English] reduce the tax allowance for business meals for the sake of Hon. Diane Marleau (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, it is greater equity. The best estimates are that this change in the tax a tragedy our blood system was contaminated as it was in the code endangers 24,000 jobs in the restaurant industry. early eighties. It is essential we understand why it happened and Would the minister please explain to the people of Canada and make sure it never happens again. to the workers in this industry how the likely effects of his proposed tax measures are consistent with his party’s campaign A budget was set by a previous government. It allows the slogan jobs, jobs, jobs? beginning of the inquiry. I know that cabinet will give consider- ation to the request for further funding. Hon. (Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions)): Mr. Speaker, the hon. member’s * * * quotation is from a different government. I would like to confirm that the Minister of Finance made a THE ENVIRONMENT statement in the House last Friday saying that a budget would be coming down on Tuesday. Such measures as those tax changes Hon. (Davenport): Mr. Speaker, my ques- that he mentioned will be in the budget, if indeed that is one of tion is for the minister of energy and natural resources. the changes. As she knows carbon dioxide is a primary cause of climate Mr. Herb Grubel (Capilano—Howe Sound): Mr. Speaker, I change and poses a threat as a greenhouse gas. refer to a statement made right here that this would be something that the minister would do in the budget. (1440 ) I have a supplementary question. Could the minister please In view of the fact that there is a firm commitment to reduce inform the House on the number of manyears of work that will carbon dioxide levels by 20 per cent by the year 2005, can the be created by the very capital intensive infrastructure program minister indicate to the House when she will be in a position to and how many manyears— announce a federal–provincial plan for reducing carbon dioxide emissions by 20 per cent? The Speaker: Order. I wonder if the hon. member might put his question in a little more general terms. We are getting into Hon. Anne McLellan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. specifics. Speaker, let me thank my colleague, the hon. member for Davenport, for his question on an issue of international concern. Mr. Grubel: Mr. Speaker, I will try to be politically correct. Some hon. members: Oh, oh. Generally the approach of the government is one of consulta- tion, co–operation and partnership. This is going to be a multi– The Speaker: I do not know that it is so much a matter of stakeholder process or strategy that we put in place involving all being politically correct, it is so that we can understand the levels of government, the private sector and individual Cana- question. dians. Mr. Grubel: I wonder whether the minister could tell the As the hon. member may be aware, at a historic first meeting House the number of man years and woman years of work that in November 1993 federal and provincial ministers of energy will be created by the very capital intensive infrastructure and the environment charged their officials with the task of program and how many man years and woman years of work will developing a strategy and recommendations to stabilize green- be lost by the lower spending in the very labour intensive house emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2000 and to consider restaurant sector.

1383

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Oral Questions

(1445 ) the Charlottetown agreement it is no wonder she uses that as the model. We intend to do things very differently. Hon. Douglas Peters (Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions)): Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier the We intend to work in a co–operative way with all Canadians details of the budget will be given on February 22. both through the federal and provincial governments. I say to the hon. member that this is not a matter of fighting over turf. This is The tax changes the hon. member mentions have not been not a matter of battling over jurisdiction. This is really a matter stated in this House. If there are such changes they will be stated of how we can co–operate to get the best use of very scarce in the budget itself and at that time the answer will be obvious. resources for the benefit of all Canadians. That is our objective. I am glad to say it was one that was * * * shared by all the provincial ministers at that meeting.

[Translation] * * *

SOCIAL ASSISTANCE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE Mr. Garry Breitkreuz (Yorkton—Melville): Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Francine Lalonde (Mercier): Mr. Speaker, my ques- my question is for the Minister of Finance. tion is for the Minister of Human Resources Development. In today’s newspaper coverage of the meeting of human resources On January 1 the government imposed a 7 per cent payroll tax ministers, we learned that the federal government, through its on all workers and employers in Canada in the form of an reform of social programs, intends to play a major role in social increase in unemployment insurance premiums, which all econ- assistance and deal directly with Canadians, thereby violating omists agree will kill jobs. provincial jurisdiction in that field. How is this tax increase consistent with the government’s job Will the minister dare to confirm that he is considering creation objectives described in the red book? abolishing transfers to provinces regarding social assistance and Hon. Douglas Peters (Secretary of State (International launch a direct payment program for Quebecers and Canadians? Financial Institutions)): Mr. Speaker, the unemployment in- [English] surance premium increase that came into effect in January was a minimum amount. At the same time it was announced by the Hon. Lloyd Axworthy (Minister of Human Resources minister that the premiums would be held at a flat level because Development and Minister of Western Economic Diversifi- of the job creation commitment this government has. cation): Mr. Speaker, what I can confirm is that yesterday we Mr. Garry Breitkreuz (Yorkton—Melville): Mr. Speaker, if had a very co–operative, collaborative discussion with all the increasing UI premiums kills jobs, then it follows that reducing ministers from the provinces. We agreed to undertake a major UI premiums would create jobs. review and re–examination of a number of programs that affect Canadians. That was a clear demonstration of how federalism When does the minister expect to announce a reduction in UI works well when you make it work well and when you want to premiums? make it work well. Hon. Lloyd Axworthy (Minister of Human Resources We look forward to working together at both levels of Development and Minister of Western Economic Diversifi- government to ensure that Canada’s social programs effectively cation): Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Finance meet the needs of all Canadians. with whom I have had many interesting and co–operative discussions on this matter, if the hon. member could curb his [Translation] patience the Minister of Finance will present one of the most important and significant long term documents this House has Mrs. Francine Lalonde (Mercier): Mr. Speaker, very cordial seen in a long time next Tuesday. agreements were also reached at Meech Lake and in Charlotte- town between the ministers representing the two levels of * * * government. How can the minister explain that his government, which was elected on the platform of no more references to the (1450 ) constitution, is so blatantly violating provincial jurisdiction? IMMIGRATION [English] Mr. Reg Alcock (Winnipeg South): Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. Hon. Lloyd Axworthy (Minister of Human Resources Development and Minister of Western Economic Diversifi- Like many other members I have had an opportunity to meet cation): Mr. Speaker, coming from a member who voted against with refugees from the former Yugoslavia. These people are in

1384

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Oral Questions terrible shape. They have family members scattered all across ple of most favoured nation treatment be preserved in any such the former Yugoslavia or in the surrounding countries. arrangements. Can the Minister for Citizenship and Immigration tell us what [Translation] impact the changes he announced recently will have on refugees Mr. Yvan Loubier (Saint–Hyacinthe—Bagot): Mr. Speaker, in general, but in particular refugees from the former Yugosla- the Minister for International Trade agrees with our views. via? My supplementary question is for the Prime Minister. Would Hon. Sergio Marchi (Minister of Citizenship and Im- it not be desirable for the Prime Minister to personally inform migration): Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his question the President of the United States of Canada’s interests and and interest in this area. concerns? In addition to our peacekeeping role which is well known to [English] all in this Chamber, Canada has attempted to do its best through immigration and refugee policies to try to alleviate the suffering Hon. Roy MacLaren (Minister for International Trade): in that area. Mr. Speaker, the discussions to which the hon. member refers have been broken off, as he is probably aware, and the United In 1992 the previous government extended a special program States is acting unilaterally in the protection of what it sees as its whereby individuals from the former republic of Yugoslavia in trade interests. There is no reason for the on visitors visas would be allowed to reunify with their Canada to intervene in that situation. families. We have agreed to extend that program until July of this year. Some 3,000 individuals have taken advantage of that The concern we had was centred on whether the United States measure. In addition, we have also permitted on a similar family and Japan would agree, which they have not, upon measures that reunification basis for individuals in the former republic of could have affected Canadian trade interests. That has not Yugoslavia to apply from there and some 8,500 people have happened. taken advantage of that program. * * * Also, in the levels that we have announced, 7,300 will be government sponsored refugees. Of that we have increased the MUSEUM OF INDUSTRIAL HISTORY number from the former republic of Yugoslavia to 2,400. We Mr. Randy White (Fraser Valley West): Mr. Speaker, my have also provided a reserve of 400 that we would not for one question is for the Prime Minister. moment be shy to use if conditions worsen in that part of the world. Canadians can remember that the previous Prime Minister provided for a federal penitentiary in his riding at taxpayers’ We have every hope that sanity will prevail very quickly. expense. Now the federal government recently approved $4.5 million of funding for a museum of industrial history in Shawi- * * * nigan, the current Prime Minister’s riding. [Translation] Is it the intention of the present Prime Minister to equal or exceed the former Prime Minister in delivering federal funding INTERNATIONAL TRADE to his own constituency? Mr. Yvan Loubier (Saint–Hyacinthe—Bagot): Mr. Speaker, Hon. André Ouellet (Minister of Foreign Affairs): Mr. in recent days, we witnessed the unfortunate breakdown of trade Speaker, let me tell the hon. member that this project was asked negotiations between the United States and Japan. If the verbal for many months ago by the local authorities. In fact, the escalation degenerates into a real trade war between those two municipal government, the provincial government and all the countries, Quebec and Canada will likely be adversely affected. political parties in the province of Quebec unanimously support this initiative. It is sad the hon. member’s party did not run a My question is directed to the Minister for International candidate in Quebec because I suspect that party would have Trade. Is the minister not concerned by the adverse effect this supported the project also. conflict could have for Quebec and Canada? (1455) [English] The contribution of the federal government is modest Hon. Roy MacLaren (Minister for International Trade): compared with the contributions coming from the private sector Mr. Speaker, throughout the period of negotiation between the and the provincial government. It will allow the creation of United States and Japan we have made consistent and frequent employment. It will be a centre of tourism. It will generate and interventions with both countries. This was done to ensure that spin off a number of financial consequences which will benefit any trade measures they contemplate on a bilateral level do not the entire region and not exclusively the riding of the Prime sideswipe other GATT members, in other words, that the princi- Minister.

1385

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Oral Questions Mr. Randy White (Fraser Valley West): Mr. Speaker, time nities particularly in Asia and across the Pacific, including for and time again we hear just what we heard a moment ago. That example our friends in Korea who offer us all sorts of new seems to be a commitment of previous governments or of some trading opportunities. other past groups. The fact is if this government can do away with EH–101s it certainly could have prevented this $4.5 * * * million expenditure. Is the Prime Minister today delivering on the promise he made last fall in his own campaign to look after his riding? Is the Mr. Chuck Strahl (Fraser Valley East): Mr. Speaker, my Prime Minister saying that he is delivering $4.5 million to his question is for the President of the Treasury Board. own riding at the expense of taxpayers across this country? Treasury Board has a policy allowing employees to attend Hon. André Ouellet (Minister of Foreign Affairs): Mr. school full time while receiving full pay. Recently someone in Speaker, let me remind the hon. member that this contribution is the National Transportation Agency received a salary of more part of a number of other contributions from the private sector. than $80,000 a year while attending university full time. The private sector is investing three times the amount the (1500 ) federal government is investing in this project. Will the minister tell us how many federal employees are It will create employment for hundreds in the region and will currently on this paid leave status, attending university instead serve the interests not only of the riding of the Prime Minister of performing the work for which they were hired? but the entire region. Hon. Arthur C. Eggleton (President of the Treasury Board I assure the hon. member that if he visits the area he will be and Minister responsible for Infrastructure): Mr. Speaker, proud to see that this region is benefiting from the overall employees go on training programs to learn and to be able to use expenditures of the Canadian government. that as a valuable resource of information when it comes to doing their job. * * * I would be happy to look into any of the specifics the hon. [Translation] member happens to be concerned about. The government is concerned with the efficient spending of tax dollars. Certainly CANADIAN EXPORTS training is a very important part of efficient use of tax dollars. Mr. Yves Rocheleau (Trois–Rivières): Mr. Speaker, my * * * question is directed to the Minister for International Trade. PEARSON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT This morning we learned that Canada’s position as an export- ing country has been deteriorating for ten years. From 1982 to Mr. Joseph Volpe (Eglinton—Lawrence): Mr. Speaker, you 1992, Canada’s share of world exports was reduced by over 5 per and other members will know of the importance of Pearson cent. This translates into an export loss of $7 billion in U.S. International Airport to the Canadian economy. It is one of dollars and, according to Claude Picher of La Presse, represents Canada’s most prized pieces of infrastructure. Its importance to a 300,000 job loss for Canada. the economy of southern Ontario and to all of Canada is beyond question. What concrete measure does the government intend to take to Recently there have been some reports in the press that have correct the disastrous situation of Canadian exports, which is an given us a confused message on what will be happening to this important reason for the collapse of our job market? valuable piece of infrastructure. [English] Would the Minister of Transport be so good as to clarify for all Hon. Roy MacLaren (Minister for International Trade): members present what the position of the government might be Mr. Speaker, the statistics the hon. member cites reflect the fact with respect to any plans in the short term or the long term for that there has been a global recession. Specifically in the case of improving the performance of Pearson and in fact improving the Canada, however, we have put in place a number of initiatives value of this piece of Canadian infrastructure? intended to take the opportunities offered to Canadian compa- Hon. Douglas Young (Minister of Transport): Mr. Speaker, nies by the successful conclusion of the Uruguay round at the I certainly agree with the hon. member that Pearson has enor- GATT and by the implementation of NAFTA as elaborated by mous economic importance, not just to the greater Toronto area this government when it came into office. but to Canada as a whole. Our trade promotion programs and activities are intended not The question we must face and that I want to address in only to exploit those additional opportunities that result from response to my hon. friend’s question is that in the short term we the reduction in trade barriers but also to identify new opportu- have announced there will be no new construction this year. We

1386

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Privilege are going to complete the construction that was begun last year bandwagon to discredit my qualifications. I was accused, tried, under a quick start project. convicted and executed due to their sheer ignorance. They created an hysteria without checking the facts with me regarding I want to emphasize that we intend to listen to members of my academic credentials. Some accusations such as exaggerat- Parliament from the greater Toronto area. We intend to listen to ing my qualifications were mild in comparison to assertions of the leaders of the municipalities, the city of Toronto and other outright lying about my credentials. communities in that area to make sure that when we do some- thing at Pearson we do the right thing. On the public record I categorically refute all accusations of lying, exaggerating or misrepresenting any of my academic * * * credentials.

PRESENCE IN GALLERY I have earned a bachelor of science degree, a master of science degree in physics, a master of education degree in administra- The Speaker: I wish to draw to the attention of members the tion, a post graduate certification in education and, last but not presence in the gallery of three distinguished visitors: His least, a certification of completion of intermediate in laws Excellency Sung–Joo Han, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the abbreviated as LLB intermediate from the University of Lon- Republic of Korea; Hon. Jim Smith, Minister of Community and don. Social Services of the Nova Scotia Legislature; and Hon. Dan Miller, Minister of Skills, Training and Labour of the Legisla- I would like to add that none of these credentials is honorary ture of British Columbia. or purchased from a diploma factory. I would also like to add that LLB intermediate is not a degree. It is a recognition of Some hon. members: Hear, hear. successful completion of two years of law education at the University of London, England. * * * To clear any doubts whether any such recognition exists, I PRIVILEGE would like to quote relevant information from the certificate of completion sent by the registrar of the University of London on MEMBER FOR MARKHAM—WHITCHURCH—STOUFFVILLE February 2, 1994. It reads: ‘‘This is to certify that Jag Bhaduria passed the intermediate examination in laws in 1976 in the Mr. Jag Bhaduria (Markham—Whitchurch—Stouffville): following subjects’’, et cetera, et cetera. I respectfully request Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of personal privilege to clarify unanimous consent to table these documents. an issue that has become a subject of debate not only in this Chamber but also across the nation. I have also been accused of misrepresenting myself or repre- senting myself as a lawyer. I have never been a lawyer or This has impeded my ability to function effectively and represented myself as a lawyer to anyone. Even completion of a efficiently as the member of Parliament for the riding of law degree will not entitle me to practise law without fulfilling Markham—Whitchurch—Stouffville. This is the earliest oppor- further requirements. There are many persons in Ontario and in tunity for me to address the issue in the House. other provinces who do possess completed law degrees but are not lawyers. Approximately two weeks before allegations against me first appeared in the media, I was contacted and threatened by an I can understand the anger generated by these wild, false and anonymous telephone caller. It was suggested to me that I baseless accusations. I agree with and applaud the right hon. should withdraw a pending appeal against the Toronto Board of Prime Minister when he stated that he does not like being lied to. Education at the Court of Appeal level; if I did not I would Nor do I. Nor does any hon. member of the House. become front page news and suffer dire consequences. I ignored this threat and as a result I am standing before the House today. With my conviction and firm belief in the policy of honesty Threats of blackmail or intimidation should not and will not and integrity of elected officials at all levels, I refute these false compromise my commitment to free speech as a member of allegations in the presence of my peers in the House. We do not Parliament. Since this threat was made, accusations about my have to be saints but we must strive to uphold these principles. I qualifications have been reported in the media. invite my colleagues in the House to examine my academic credentials and weigh the accusations in a rational and judicious (1505 ) manner.

These accusations have seriously damaged my personal and In conclusion I request the House to ensure that no Canadian professional credibility. In fact the media went beyond making be subjected to the demeaning and humiliating accusations I simple accusations. They carried on a campaign of character have been confronted with since becoming a member of Parlia- assassination and were joined by others who jumped on the ment.

1387

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Tributes The Speaker: The Chair at this point is not convinced of the and other issues affecting to different degrees people suffering linkage between the words that the member has used and his around the world. impediment to being able to carry out his functions. I had the privilege to face Irénée Pelletier during the 1984 (1510 ) general election. If I may, I would like to relate an election anecdote that says a lot about Mr. Pelletier. We conducted two However, I wish to review the documents which I will permit polls during the election. The first one said basically two things: to be put on the table but not tabled. I will consider what the hon. first, that Mr. Pelletier was very popular with Sherbrooke member has said and I will get back to the House just as soon as voters, which was bad news for the other candidates. Another is feasible. piece of bad news at the very beginning of the campaign was that Mr. Pelletier was going to win the election. The second poll asked the same questions, with the same results. * * * [Translation] (1515) At the end of the campaign, Mr. Pelletier was just as popular THE LATE IRÉNÉE PELLETIER with Sherbrooke voters but this time we found out the wave that was about to sweep Canada was also going to have an impact in Hon. Jean J. Charest (Sherbrooke): Mr. Speaker, even as I the constituency he had been representing since 1972. address this House, Mr. Irénée Pelletier, who was the member of Parliament for the constituency of Sherbrooke between 1972 Today, it is with some emotion that I join those who have and 1984 and who unfortunately passed away last Friday, is known him in saying how much we will miss him. I met Irénée being buried in a religious ceremony in the church at Saint–An- Pelletier several times after the 1984 election. He was always dré–de–Madawaska, the village of his birth. very generous. I saw him a few days before he died. He was a committed man who served his community better than anyone Irénée Pelletier died at the age of 54. He was the 13th of 14 else ever did. He left his mark in Sherbrooke in several areas children, something many of us can identify with, and he because he was a very effective member of Parliament, and he accomplished many things in his life. always supported those who sought to help the disadvantaged in our society. After receiving a BA from St. Francis Xavier University in Nova Scotia, he earned a Ph.D. in political science from the Sherbrooke has a service organization called Cercovie that he University of Toulouse in France. The subject of his thesis was was instrumental in founding several years ago. We can thank Canada’s aid to developing countries, and this was in the very Irénée Pelletier for that accomplishment. early seventies. On behalf of my family and especially of those who knew Mr. He had a very full life. He was a member of the Canadian Pelletier, who had the privilege to be represented by him in the forces and he was also very active. He travelled extensively and House of Commons, I want to say how much we will miss him. I after his studies he worked as a professor with the faculty of especially want to offer our sincere condolences to his family administration at the University of Sherbrooke. In 1972 he ran and say in closing that the constituency of Sherbrooke and the for the first time as the candidate of the country as a whole have lost a great man. in the riding of Sherbrooke. Of course he won that election and those that followed in 1974, 1979 and 1980. Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister): Madam Speaker, I would also like to speak on this subject. I too would While sitting in the House of Commons as the member for like to extend my sympathies to the family of Irénée Pelletier, a Sherbrooke, he was very active and became interested in several distinguished member of Parliament who served with me in this issues. For several years he chaired the Standing Committee on House for 12 years. Regional Industrial Expansion. He was Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture. He was also very active in In my view, here was a man who truly embodied what Canada various interparliamentary groups. stands for. Hailing from the Madawaska Valley in New Bruns- wick, he earned a degree from St. Francis Xavier University in He was very interested in peace and disarmament issues. In Nova Scotia. He went on to earn a Ph.D. in political science in fact—I remember because he told me himself—he had to make a France before returning to teach in Sherbrooke. personal, very difficult decision when the House held a debate on cruise missiles and he felt compelled to vote against his own First elected to the House of Commons in 1972 he was, in the government on a motion to test these missiles. words of his successor, an excellent member of Parliament. He was extremely dedicated and friends with everyone. He was He told me how torn he was feeling during this debate and very industrious and keenly interested in international affairs. how he finally decided to take a very personal position that, Typically, however, he was deeply concerned about poverty and incidentally, reflected his deep concern over the hunger problem focused a lot of his attention on regional development. Given his

1388

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Tributes rural roots, he was appointed Parliamentary Secretary to the [Translation] Minister of Agriculture. After being defeated in 1984 he became involved in municipal Individuals like Irénée Pelletier who serve in Parliament are politics, was elected alderman and then of North Hatley. fine examples for others to emulate. On behalf of Aline and my party, I want to offer my condolences to the Pelletier family. Three years ago Mr. Pelletier studied in Rome to become a May he always be remembered as a gentleman who served his priest. This was to be the crowning achievement of a career in riding, his province and his country with distinction. which the emphasis had always been on dedication.

Mr. David Berger (Saint–Henri—Westmount): Madam On my behalf and that of my colleagues, I wish to extend my Speaker, I too served with Irénée Pelletier from 1979 to 1984 deepest sympathies to his family and friends, as well as to all and I was deeply saddened by his demise. those who were close to him.

Mr. Pelletier came from Saint–André–de–Madawaska, New Mr. Jean H. Leroux (Shefford): Madam Speaker, although I Brunswick. A former university professor in Sherbrooke with a did not know Mr. Pelletier, I wish to recognize his service in doctorate in history, he represented the people of Sherbrooke in government from 1972 to 1984. On behalf of all members of the the House of Commons, as my hon. colleagues pointed out, for Bloc Quebecois, I would like to offer my sincere condolences to 12 years, from 1972 to 1984. the family and friends of Mr. Irénée Pelletier, former member of Parliament for Sherbrooke. In October 1975 he was appointed Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture, the Hon. Eugene Whelan. [English]

Mr. Pelletier was a great champion of the Canadian marketing Mr. Nelson Riis (Kamloops): Madam Speaker, I want to join board system. with my colleagues in paying tribute to Irénée Pelletier, whom we remember in this House from the seventies and early [English] eighties. We remember him to be a very popular member in his constituency. Often visitors from the constituency would come At a conference of Canadian grocery distributors in 1977 he to Ottawa and he would go out of his way to introduce them, decried the sometimes adversarial relationship between govern- particularly to those of us from western Canada. I personally ment and the food industry. always appreciated that.

(1520 ) The fact that he won election after election speaks well of the kind of constituency person he was. We all remember the issues He said: ‘‘An effective food policy, supported and adminis- that he was deeply devoted to, not only in terms of overseas tered through effective programs, is one that can only be development from a Canadian perspective but particularly his achieved by a united approach’’. concern for the plight of people living in many of the countries in which our aid projects were undertaken. [Translation] He would share those experiences from his travels and his One subject was particularly close to his heart and that was knowledge with us in the House, particularly in those days in the aid to developing countries. He even wrote his doctoral disserta- evenings over dinner. He would come back from a trip and tion on this subject. In 1976 he travelled the country with fellow explain the kinds of conditions he experienced. I found him to be members Andrew Brewin and Douglas Roche to make Cana- a very motivating individual and a very kind and compassionate dians aware of the needs of developing countries. member of Parliament.

In a speech, Mr. Pelletier said: I simply want to join with my colleagues in saying that Mr. Pelletier will be missed. Our hearts and our prayers go out to [English] him, to his family and to his friends today. Again I want to say how sad we were when we learned of his passing. ‘‘Canadians have not only a Christian responsibility but a human responsibility to help correct inequalities, and if the [Translation] developed nations do not share with the developing nations chaos will result. Fifteen per cent of the world’s population Mr. Clifford Lincoln (Parliamentary Secretary to Deputy control close to eighty per cent of the world’s wealth. Under Prime Minister and Minister of the Environment): Madam these conditions we are just not going to have a peaceful world. Speaker, I would like to take a few moments to pay tribute to the The Third World is just not going to accept it’’. memory of Dr. Irénée Pelletier.

1389

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders I had the opportunity to deal with him on several occasions However, careful study of the specific design of the current between 1985 and 1989. I think he was not only a politician and bridge did satisfy all of the requirements. academic but mostly a person of great integrity and human warmth who was interested in his community, his country and A special panel was convened to study the effects of the anything that had to do with the quality of life. bridge on ice in the Northumberland Strait and it concluded that the bridge would have no significant effect. He was always ready to work with all interested parties to improve the quality of life not only for ourselves but also for the generations to come. I would like to pay tribute to his memory Fishermen and ferry workers were concerned that the bridge and to extend my deepest sympathy to his family. would affect their livelihood and their specific concerns have been addressed with a settlement being reached with the fisher- men in the area just last week. Talks are continuing with the ______ferry workers. I have every confidence that they too will come to a successful and mutually acceptable conclusion.

GOVERNMENT ORDERS The work on the project has already begun and the economic upsurge in the Borden area of Prince Edward Island is noticeable (1525) already. The construction of the yards for fabrication of the concrete piers of the bridge is under way and employment has [English] been created both there and in the town of Borden which is undergoing a mini real estate boom. PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND FIXED LINK Just last week a tender was awarded to a New Brunswick firm The House resumed consideration of the motion. for $40 million worth of concrete to be delivered to the site, a Mr. George Proud (Hillsborough): Madam Speaker, this is contract which will create some 50 additional jobs. The the third time that I have had the opportunity to make a construction will get into full swing in the year ahead and the statement in this House concerning an aspect of the continuing economic spin–offs will be of tremendous importance to Prince saga of the fixed link between Prince Edward Island and the Edward Island and to the rest of the region. mainland. The very fact that the construction is under way has pointed For the benefit of those members who have recently joined us out a major flaw which presently exists in our transportation in this Chamber, this is an issue which has been at the top of the system. Because of the geological make–up of Prince Edward political agenda in Atlantic Canada for many years. The first Island it is necessary to transport gravel and fill from New major discussions about a fixed link evolved around a railway Brunswick for construction of the yards in Borden. The truck tunnel in the late 1880s. Then there was a combination of bridge, traffic, as a result of this, has necessitated extra crossings of the causeway and tunnel in the 1950s and 1960s. Now we are at the ferry this year. There have been delays in truck traffic because of stage at which the actual construction of a bridge has begun. increased volume. All consumer products that come into Prince Edward Island come in by truck, and every delay adds to the The construction of a bridge between Prince Edward Island eventual cost paid by consumers. and the mainland has not been without controversy. Several court challenges have been mounted to prevent the construction. (1530) To those who oppose this project I must say I respect the passion which they have shown for the cause, but at the same Because of the severely cold weather this winter which has time I must respectfully disagree with the positions they have affected most of Canada there has been a tremendous build–up put forward. The governments of the Atlantic provinces, the of ice in the Northumberland Strait. Some crossings last week Government of Canada and the vast majority of the residents of took over five hours whereas in summer it would take about 45 the regions agree that the construction of a fixed link should go minutes. ahead. One by one the barriers to the construction of this project have This shows that an improved system of transporting our goods fallen away. The latest reincarnation of this project, if I may be out and our consumer products in is badly needed. If we in permitted to use that term, came about in 1987. Since that time Prince Edward Island are to prosper and if our economy is to more than 90 studies have been conducted and countless public recover we must have a dependable and efficient transportation meetings have been held with the general public and with link with the rest of Canada. We have gone beyond the time special interest groups in all three maritime provinces. where we can adopt a casual attitude when it comes to getting our goods to market. The world has become a highly competitive Now it has been said, and it is true, that the original generic place and we have to compete at the very highest level if we are design of the bridge did not pass an environmental review panel. to succeed.

1390

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders A few days ago I spoke in the House about the need for mainland was steamship during the summer months and ice- continued equalization payments to help the poorer areas of boats powered by oars in the winter. Canada carry on while they develop their economies. This fixed link project is one of the major construction projects in Canada The construction of the railway led Prince Edward Island into today. When it is completed it will leave the lasting effect of Confederation. Our Fathers of Confederation were sufficiently an improved transportation system in our area. astute to include provisions in the Constitution that there be a steam service provided by the Government of Canada. Like the The benefits will not only be immediate as we enjoy this transportation systems of the day that was a state of the art influx of capital into our economy. They will flow to us for many constitutional provision. It made sense at the time to guarantee years to come. The construction itself will create a pool of that the best available transportation system was included in the expertise in Atlantic Canada which will be in demand around the Constitution. That is precisely what this amendment is doing world for similar projects. The bridge itself will initiate a today. It is bringing the Constitution and its provisions with stability in our marketplace that is not there at the present time. respect to transportation up to the present time. In the future people can plan, schedules can be set, and products can get to market. (1535) There are those who have argued, even in court, that this The last number of years have not been bright in Atlantic provision of the Constitution should not be changed. They have Canada. Our unemployment rate is the highest of any region. I used that argument to try to prevent the building of the link. That also said a few days ago that there was not a politician in argument is no more valid than it would be to argue that some of Atlantic Canada who would not be happy to see equalization the statutes in some of our jurisdictions which once banned the funds flowing out of our region to help other areas of Canada automobile should not be changed. rather than flowing in to bring us up to national standards. That is what this project is about. It is about creating opportunity for The Constitution is a living thing. Constitutions must change Atlantic Canada. It is about creating the opportunity which will and adapt to the changing times in which we live and to the allow Prince Edward Island and the rest of Atlantic Canada to advances and changes in technology which affect our daily stand on their own two feet. lives. One wonders if the ferry service between Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick has been constitutional since the We have tremendous resources in our region. We live within a steamship gave way to the diesel powered ship many years ago. one–day drive of millions of people who are looking for quality goods and services. We must be prepared to go after those This amendment will allow for people of one province of markets and we must have the tools to be able to compete. Canada, Prince Edward Island, to become full partners with the rest of the country. The Trans–Canada Highway in Prince Edward Island will be joined to the Trans–Canada Highway in Since I have been involved in public life, and that goes back New Brunswick and islanders will be able to transport their some 20 years, we have heard among other things two prescrip- goods directly to market in a timely and efficient manner. tions for the recovery of Atlantic Canada. It has always been said, first, that we must add more value to our products and, We are entering an exciting time in Atlantic Canada. A new second, that we should extend the length of our tourist season. era of prosperity will come to our region fuelled in part by the Both these will become easier when the completion of the link regional economic policies of the government and in part by the and the improved transportation network it will entail become a construction of this very major project. reality. I urge all hon. members to support this constitutional amend- The construction of this bridge represents our best hope in ment and to bring the Constitution of Canada as it impacts on the both the short and long term to create a dramatic economic transportation system of Prince Edward Island into the 21st improvement in Prince Edward Island and the rest of the century. maritime provinces. That is why we in the House must show our [Translation] continuing support for the project. That brings us to the debate we are conducting today. Mr. François Langlois (Bellechasse): Madam Speaker, I am glad to be able to make a few comments on the interesting Transportation has always been one of our most dominant speech of my hon. colleague who just spoke. concerns in Atlantic Canada. During the age of sail we were at the leading edge of the world technology but during the winter On this side of the House, it is always with interest that we months we could not sail very far. The age of sail gave way to the observe what is being done for some provinces of Canada, age of steam and changes had to be made. At the time that Prince especially Prince Edward Island which was able to renegotiate Edward Island entered Confederation in 1873 and for a number its terms of union with Canada and which today sees a project of years thereafter, the link between my province and the which has long been a source of argument on the Island and in

1391

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders the rest of Canada. The federal government will finally allocate to answer a few questions raised today. Neither the minister nor the required funds. I had the opportunity to provide answers. Considering the expressed desire of the people of Prince Some members will recall that a member of the Reform Party Edward Island and the willingness of the federal government to questioned the process the government was undertaking with invest in this project, all we can do is acknowledge the demo- respect to this initiative. I remind that colleague and other cratically achieved decision of the population of P.E.I., which colleagues that the judge had directed the constitutional change. was presented with all the facts. It is not for us to decide what is The judge had indicated the change could be undertaken via good for them. We can only respect their will, although we look section 43. It is important to make those points for fear that with some envy at the terms of union of British Columbia, which someone may believe proper advice was not followed. included a railroad from sea to sea, and more recently at the I was also somewhat taken aback by that member of Parlia- promises made to Newfoundland, in 1949, after lengthy negoti- ment who, with a certain amount of enthusiasm, suggested the ations. government had received nothing but bad advice, that it might Unfortunately Quebec never really negotiated its terms of even have been proceeding illegally. I have to say this person union. We were, through an Act of the British Parliament, does not lack in confidence and I wonder what credible source incorporated into a union of British colonies in North America. my colleague was quoting. In 1867, we did not have much to say. No referendum was held in I underline as well the fact that the people of Prince Edward Quebec then, despite the repeated requests of the Liberal Island joined the union. They made that decision with a condi- opposition. tion and it is correct for them to amend that condition. It is This is why we hope that in a few months, like our friends in correct for them to determine that condition should be changed Prince Edward Island, we will be able to make a wise, enlight- because they decided to join under it. ened and positive decision as to our fate as a nation and our [Translation] desire to negotiate with Canada the terms of Quebec accession to full sovereignty. This morning, I believe the Bloc Quebecois made reference to a firm which indicated that some $1.3 billion might be spent on (1540 ) that project. If that is indeed the comment made, it is erroneous. The fact is that this firm said in 1988 that even if the project was [English] to cost $1.3 billion, it would be worth it. This is not the same statement at all. Mr. Proud: Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his intervention in the constitutional debate that he wants to get me I also want to point out that we did have a reliable source, an involved in. I want to add that this constitutional amendment independent engineer, who certified that the project would cost comes about because of the bilateral constitutional amendments approximately $840 million. Again, this amount was certified that are allowed with one province but not more than one. That is by an independent party. why this has happened in New Brunswick and in Newfoundland. I must add another comment. If there are additional costs and It is happening in Prince Edward Island today because the if the project goes over the estimated budget, what will happen? legislative assembly of Prince Edward Island passed the same I think some are under the impression that the government resolution last year. We are being asked to do so in this House would foot the bill. On the contrary, it is the private sector which today. I am sure the hon. member and his party agree that it would have to absorb these additional costs. should go ahead and see no problem in passing it. Finally, you are well aware that environmental concerns were As far as getting into the constitutional debate of the rest of raised regarding this project. I simply want to remind hon. the country, I will let other more qualified people than myself members that more than 90 studies were conducted and over 80 get involved in that. meetings were held; moreover, two court decisions concluded that the project was very reasonable from an environmental [Translation] point of view. Of course, you can never be absolutely sure, but if you look at megaprojects, you will see that the government Mr. Ronald J. Duhamel (Parliamentary Secretary to Min- proceeded very cautiously with this one, at least as regards ister of Public Works and Government Services): Madam financing and environmental aspects. Speaker, I am pleased to participate in the debate on this bill, that is this constitutional change. (1545) [English] Finally, there was this question about the workers. It is unfortunate—and I share this concern with my colleagues from I am pleased to speak in support of this resolution which will both sides of the House—that workers will be displaced. It is clear away one of the final remaining obstacles to the Northum- really very unfortunate. I want to remind this House that this berland Strait bridge project. Before proceeding further I want government makes it a priority—and I hope it is the same for all

1392

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders my other colleagues—to find ways to meet the needs of these The contract also specifies that some 70 per cent of the total men and women. procurement requirements will be sourced in the region. These requirements are massive: thousands of tonnes of cement, reinforcing steel cable, fabricated metal, manufactured compo- With regard to the fixed link project, those workers will have nents, et cetera. Given that the total project is estimated at $840 hiring preference and some will be able to take advantage of million to $850 million, the wages and procurement expendi- early retirement programs. There will be training and retraining tures paid by the developer will inject more than $.5 billion into programs as well. I insist on it and I hope that we will work very the Atlantic economy over the next five years. This should give hard together to try and make sure that these men and women a real kick–start to the economy in a region of this great country will not find themselves out of work because of the bridge. that badly needs it.

[English] It is also important to note that this bridge project most definitely is not a make–work project aimed at providing some Having answered those questions I felt needed some addition- short term relief for some of Canada’s poorer provinces. Ob- al detail, I want to proceed very quickly with some of the main viously once the bridge is built some jobs will cease, but there points I consider important from my particular perspective. will be spin–off benefits. There will be an increase in tourism and in business opportunities. I could go on. Our government made it clear during the election campaign and in the recent throne speech that putting Canadians back to [Translation] work is the number one economic, political and social challenge facing this country. We are committed to taking every step within our power to support job creation, to stimulate increased I for one have found the hon. minister’s remarks very enlight- economic activity and to restore hope and confidence in the ening and convincing today. There is no question that the bridge future for all Canadians. This project helps in reaching those project is a very good deal for the Canadian taxpayers. In particular goals. accordance with the terms of the union act signed with Prince Edward Island, the federal government is clearly required to fund a link of some kind, whether a bridge or a ferry system, to Nowhere is this more the case, the need that is, than in join the island to the mainland. Atlantic Canada which almost more than any other area of the country has suffered too long from high levels of unemployment resulting in dependency and despair. Everyone should welcome In the case of a ferry service, it would cost Canadians this initiative for that part of the country which has been hard hit taxpayers at least $42 million a year for the next 35 years to economically. allow Marine Atlantic to operate the service. This amount includes the cost of operating the ferries, the cost of mainte- nance and capital costs, for example, for the purchase of new The Northumberland Strait bridge project will have an im- icebreakers during that period. After 35 years, federal govern- mediate significant impact on the economy of Atlantic Canada ment subsidies should continue and increase because of the in general and that of Prince Edward Island in particular. The demand for service. As the minister mentioned, this would lead rest of the country can expect to feel the positive effects of this to uncontrolled spending with no end in sight, and that is not a project in the long term too. That is a positive spin off. good deal for the taxpayers of this country.

Members will recall we have estimated there will be 1,000 direct jobs for each of the four years of construction or almost (1550) 3,000 person years of employment in all. That is a lot of work for a lot of people. Under the terms of the contract between the federal government and the contractor, more than 95 per cent of Let me add a few comments to what the minister said about these jobs will come from Atlantic Canada. Of course with its the environmental quality of the project. This has attracted a lot high unemployment numbers it is of particular importance to of attention during most of the five years that the project was this area as well as the rest of Canada. being developed. The environment was the main concern of the government and of the developer. Indeed, this project has been the subject of the most thorough environmental studies ever This project will provide a tremendous boost for employment undertaken for a project of this size. As I said, there were over throughout the region. It will provide thousands of workers with 90 studies, 80 meetings and the public had many opportunities gainful employment and the opportunity to practise and improve to speak on the project requirements at some 85 public meetings. their job skills, quite apart from the work it will provide. This project meets all the technical requirements and all the However direct employment tells only part of the story. environmental requirements.

1393

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders In closing, I ask my colleagues to support this project because quite possible to do so and I consider this one appropriate. I it is sound, it will meet the economic, tourism and other needs of consider it necessary and I argued that in my remarks. the region and I think it is being approached in a most appropri- ate way. (1555)

[English] With respect to the environmental questions I know of no project that has sustained as much scrutiny as this one. I Mr. Len Taylor (The Battlefords—Meadow Lake): Madam indicated in my remarks that nothing is perfect. Certain things Speaker, the parliamentary secretary’s comments cause me to could have been overlooked. I admit that. I am not foolish to that think of a couple of questions which would appropriately be point. However, there were over 90 studies and over 80 hearings. answered by him. I will have more to say about this motion later Even our colleagues from the Bloc are supporting it in spite of when I am recognized on debate. the fact that a number of individuals pointed out that Friends of the Island had some legitimate concerns. The government and The parliamentary secretary indicated in his opening remarks the minister have been extremely responsible in this particular that the amendment today is required on the word of the courts. I case. We cannot go on forever. think the parliamentary secretary is aware that the Federal Court had a number of things to say in regard to this project. Madam With respect to the hon. member’s riding, I do not know if Justice Reed did say, as quoted by the previous minister of those particular buildings are being closed and jobs are being public works, that the constitutional amendment is not necessar- lost. However that saddens me whether it happens in Prince ily required until the ferry service is replaced. Of course the Edward Island, , Vancouver, or anywhere else in ferry service has not yet been replaced, yet we are going ahead Canada. with this. Mr. Lee Morrison (Swift Current—Maple Creek—Assini- Also the Federal Court ruled that the minister of public works boia): Madam Speaker, my colleagues have addressed the legal had failed to comply with the requirements of section 12 of the and political implications of the matter before us. I want to step environmental assessment review process and ruled that no back a little further and consider the basic premise. irrevocable decision should be taken until this is taken care of. Is it the government’s opinion that the section 12 requirements of Do we really need a 13 kilometre bridge across Northumber- the environmental assessment process have been dealt with, or land Strait? Why do we want to do this? Do the benefits does the government now consider that this constitutional outweigh the costs? Can a near bankrupt Canada afford it? These amendment may not be an irrevocable decision? questions have been debated for 30 years, but in spite of the signing last October as can be seen in this House the debate is by Finally, the department has given jobs and the economy no means over. primarily as its reasons for going ahead with the fixed link. However in my constituency in the interests of saving money the Let us start by disposing of the fiction that this will be a Department of Public Works is closing and perhaps bulldozing privately financed venture. This is a typical government project three buildings owned and occupied by the federal government. with the deal structured so that bond holders take no risk and the That is costing us jobs in the prairies and rural Canada. private operators will repay principal and interest out of the complete 100 per cent subsidy, $42 million a year indexed to I am wondering how the parliamentary secretary can justify inflation for 35 years. This is compared to the current subsidy. I closing buildings in my riding and costing jobs while at the same must take issue with the gentleman who spoke a few moments time putting money into the waters around Prince Edward Island ago when he said that the subsidy was $42 million. The current to create jobs there. subsidy is $21.7 million. That is from the public accounts. Therefore, we are talking about a virtual doubling of the subsidy Mr. Duhamel: Madam Speaker, the hon. member’s comment with the alternate program that is being proposed. with regard to the Federal Court indicating that a change needed to be undertaken but when that change had to be undertaken is The interest on the $662 million initial bond issue is going to quite right. However, it needs to be done and clearly now it is out be about $700 million, all courtesy of the Canadian taxpayer. of the way or hopefully soon will be out of the way. It removes The only difference between the deal closed on October 7 and a the last obstacle. I think we are nit–picking a little. I say this normal public works tender is that public money will be spent with kindness to my colleague. It was going to be done. It without public accountability. needed to be done. It has been done and this has been the appropriate path to follow. This gets better. Of the equity 85 per cent is held by subsid- iaries of foreign multinationals, Morrison Knutson of the United With respect to irrevocable decisions, any decision undertak- States and the French GTM International. I do not know what en by man or woman is not irrevocable. We are about to make a GTM stands for but I suspect it might mean get the money, constitutional change. We are in the process of doing so. It is because get the money they will.

1394

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders While we are paying off the debt the operators will be able to money first to pay for the groceries and then to buy champagne do whatever they wish with the net revenue from the tolls and and whisky. They stood poor old Keynes on his head and they that includes shipping the revenue out of the country. I have put us into a financial box where we have no freedom to move nothing against foreign investment. In fact I welcome it. How- about. ever, I strongly object to foreign profit taking without signifi- cant investment or risk. Even if one accepts the premise that jobs can be created at the expense of the greater economy, and I certainly do not, but let Still it gets better. The consortium has to post a $200 million me play devil’s advocate, if spending borrowed money is an performance bond, but the premium is being capitalized into the effective economic stimulus, surely the same amount of money project cost so that the taxpayer is going to pick up the tab as part could be spent on something which would provide greater of the subsidy payments. long–term benefits to more people. Even the people of Prince Edward Island are not united on this question. More than 40 per If this proposed bridge was between two heavily populated cent of them clearly indicated they do not want this gift. This is areas or if it was on a major transportation corridor it would be unprecedented. Ordinarily local people in any community will easier to justify. To spend $25,000 per family to make road fight tooth and nail for a government project because they have access marginally more convenient to an enclave of 130,000 this perception it is free. people makes no sense at all. Finally, this bridge deal was consummated in the dying days Larger, faster ferries perhaps with better ice capabilities than of the Tory government, as was the Pearson airport deal. It has those now in use could be had for a fraction of the cost. First the potential to be another Mirabel or another Olympic dome. class ferry service would not be a discriminatory burden on the Let us slow down and take a cold, hard look at what we are people of Prince Edward Island. doing.

(1600 ) The last P.E.I. bridge project was further advanced than this one is now when it was axed by the government in 1969. Of There are unanswered questions regarding the technical supe- course there will be economic penalties to pay to the operator riority of a high, wind–swept bridge compared to a stable, well and to the bondholders if we stop, but surely we can still get out designed ferry. The consensus, even among proponents of the of this with our hide intact before the project acquires irresist- bridge, is that any storm severe enough to stop ferry service will ible momentum. also stop traffic from using the bridge. What is worse, even if the winds are not quite strong enough to stop traffic, vehicles will be The one small lever that we have at our disposal in this House forced to proceed at a crawl and empty trailers will not be is to withhold approval of the proposed constitutional amend- permitted to cross. ment. Let us leave the Constitution alone. Let us provide first class ferry service in perpetuity as promised and forget about If one is coming up from Boston for a load of potatoes and completing another monument to . there is no backup ferry, one had better be prepared to park his or her semi until it gets a mite less breezy. Mr. Morris Bodnar (Saskatoon—Dundurn): Madam Speaker, the hon. member has spoken about cost reductions and As an engineer I am well aware that almost anything is whether such a project is one that should be built for practical technically possible if there is a will to do it and if there is no reasons, but in particular the cost of such a project and who limit to available resources. One takes an idea and just adds would be paying for it. I wonder whether the hon. member feels money. However, the fact that something can be done does not the same way about any federal project that may be built in his necessarily mean that it should be done. constituency. It is proposed that a healing lodge be built in his constituency when there are not many aboriginal people living Some people may invoke the memory of John Maynard there nor is there proper access to his constituency. Does he feel Keynes to justify this massive public expense as a pump–prim- that perhaps that project should be put on hold and studied again ing exercise to stimulate the economy. Lord Keynes never and maybe should not be built as well? envisioned a situation in which nearly one–third of a govern- ment’s revenue is being eaten up to pay interest on its existing (1605) debt. If we had faithfully followed his prescription and built up surpluses or at least paid down our debt during the good times I Mr. Morrison: Madam Speaker, I concur most wholehearted- could perhaps agree that more government spending might be of ly with the hon. member. some economic benefit. Mr. Ronald J. Duhamel (Parliamentary Secretary to Min- Unfortunately during the 1970s and the early 1980s the ister of Public Works and Government Services): Madam Government of Canada and most governments in the world piled Speaker, very quickly I want to know, and I take it I probably do up debts in good times, not for any lasting benefit but to finance now, that the hon. member’s party does not support this project. current expenditures. Like spendthrift families, they borrowed The Bloc does, but his party does not. I am always interested in

1395

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders trying to see the differences, apart from the language differ- What does the hon. member mean by first class ferry service? ences. This is what I understand. I hope this is not an example.

My colleague is playing devilish little tricks with the subsidy The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu): I am sorry, the time has of $21.7 million. He knows full well the figures I used were with expired for questions or comments. respect to capital and other costs. As an engineer he knows that. Let us not play silly little games. Mr. Jim Hart (Okanagan—Similkameen—Merritt): Mad- am Speaker, it is a privilege to rise today to speak on this I would like to know what is his definition of an enclave. My constitutional amendment regarding the Prince Edward Island definition of an enclave is somewhat pejorative. I am sure he did fixed link. not mean that P.E.I. is some sort of foreign territory surrounded by others. I would like to stress those words; we are talking about a constitutional amendment. We seem to be slipping by that little There is a contradiction here. One of his colleagues said: bit of information very quickly in some of the speeches we have ‘‘Let’s have a referendum. We’ll do whatever the referendum heard today. results are’’ and the member says: ‘‘Hey, let’s not do it’’. Who is speaking for the Reform Party? Is there any consistency? (1610)

Mr. Morrison: Madam Speaker, I am delighted that the hon. I would like to begin by quoting from Hansard of May 19, member raised the question of the referendum. 1992 when the House was embroiled in the debate on constitu- tional concerns. ‘‘We believe that the referendum should be a First, it was not a referendum, it was a plebiscite. Second, the permanent part of the process for revising the Canadian Consti- terms of the plebiscite were very clear in that they stated: tution; nor can it be restricted to one or just a few provinces. The ‘‘Would you approve of this project if it is going to be more referendum ought to be national so that all Canadians in all economically feasible than improved ferry service and if there is regions of this country have the opportunity to speak on the no danger to the environment?’’ Since neither of those qualifica- same issue.’’ These are very democratic words and I concur with tions has been met, I would suggest that if we want to have a them. They are from the current minister of public works. referendum we should have a real one, make it binding, have it now and see how far we get. I have no problem with the construction of a fixed link. The merits and drawbacks of this bridge have been widely discussed As far as referring to Prince Edward Island as an enclave, the and debated in Prince Edward Island, across the nation and in the hon. member says that is pejorative. He may think so. He House of Commons. The economic benefits and the costs have obviously reads a different dictionary than I do. all been given consideration. The environmental considerations have all been weighed. Most important, the people of Prince Mr. Duhamel: It is a standard one, English. Edward Island gave their assent in a plebiscite held in 1988.

Mr. Morrison: It is surrounded by water. Water is a rather The problem is that we are talking about a constitutional effective barrier to most means of transport. I refer to it as an amendment, something that affects each and every person in this enclave in those terms. country.

Mr. (Malpeque): Madam Speaker, the mem- I would like to paint a picture. Members in this room should ber mentioned that maybe it is time to move to a first class ferry think of a triangle. A triangle stands on a broad base and rises to service. I do not know if he is familiar with Prince Edward a point. This is the way I believe and my party believes we Island and the amount of physical goods and products we move should approach these matters, with broad consultation and off the island. Our experience with the ferry service in recent moving toward a point where we can get a consensus. With this years has been fairly poor. motion the government is turning the triangle so it is inverted and there is no broad base of representation from the people of In fact, talking about economic efficiency, I spoke with some Canada. This is something that the Reform Party of Canada truckers today. The wait at the ferry for truckers is anywhere believes in very strongly, as do many millions of Canadians. from three to five hours. As many as 50 to 80 trucks at a time are sometimes waiting in line for the car ferries. One can only We are all aware that Madam Justice Reed decided the handle 13 and the other at maximum can handle 45. The hon. Canadian Constitution has to be amended in order for the fixed member has to understand that that is just not good enough. We link to proceed. However, the reasoning behind the motion in believe a link will change that. front of us is flawed for two reasons: First, the motion is too specific. It makes specific reference to a fixed link, entrenching When we look at the truckers, the fuel they are burning, the it in the Constitution. Second, the motion should entrench the hours, taking a day longer to get to market in terms of schedul- intent of the original terms of union, that is to ensure reliable ing and so on, it is a disaster for them and for the agricultural and regular travel between Prince Edward Island and the main- industry as well. land, without entrenching the link specifically in the Consti-

1396

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders tution. My colleague, the member for Fraser Valley East, dealt Mr. Ronald J. Duhamel (Parliamentary Secretary to Min- with this issue at great length. ister of Public Works and Government Services): Madam Speaker, I want to make sure that my colleague’s understanding I find it inconsistent that this government proposes to open of this constitutional change is the same or different from mine. the Constitution and make changes only when it suits its purposes. Prince Edward Island 130 years ago decided that it could and would become part of Canada with a certain condition, that ferry I would like to read another quote. On February 3 in the House service would be provided forever and a day. the Prime Minister of Canada stated that: ‘‘No one in Canada Over the years, a number of options have been examined such wants to discuss the Constitution’’. Here we are today discus- as a fixed link. There is now a project under way. It was a sing the Constitution. judgment of a federal court that unless there were a constitution- al change indicating simply that ferry service could be changed We all saw the rejection of the Charlottetown accord and what by fixed link—that is all it does—the government could be in a the Canadian people thought of it. This is just another case of the position in which it would have to build a bridge and continue government’s agenda versus that of the Canadian people. The the ferry service. government has chosen to selectively change the Constitution. Canadians do not accept this method. The subsidies, as I have defined them for the ferry service, are going to be used to pay for the bridge. After that, there will not I would submit that any changes to the Constitution should be any more contribution by Canada. involve all Canadians and should be approved in a referendum. The Constitution should be concerned with the broad definition Is my hon. colleague saying that the elected representatives of of matters rather than ways and means of accomplishing the Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick and Canada should not be intent, such as a fixed link. determining that it is okay for a fixed link bridge to be replacing ferry service? That is the way I understand this change. (1615 ) He understands it differently. Could he tell me how his interpretation is different from mine? I have read this several The Constitution should deal with Canada’s commitment to times and that is all I am getting from it. maintain communications and transportation with Prince Ed- ward Island no matter what the method chosen to accomplish Mr. Hart: Madam Speaker, in response to the question, it is this. my interpretation that the intent 130 years ago was to provide communication and transportation. We are running into the danger of making constitutional commitments for Canada that may not be in the best interest for I feel that this motion should not be directly related to a fixed all of the country. Technology may change. Currently in this day link because of what I have said in my address to this House. and age we must realize the rate at which things change. We are Technology may change. It is wrong to assume that there would going to have to commit to this fixed link throughout time if it is be no cost to all Canadian taxpayers down the road. entrenched in the Constitution. We are entrenching this in the Constitution. That means that These are things that we have no control of and that may we must ensure over a long period of time into the future that change. I can give members the example of the Florida sunshine this will be maintained. skyway and the Chesapeake Bay bridge. They have been known to close for months at a time. Are the proper plans in place for Mr. Milliken: Madam Speaker, on a point of order, there have this fixed link? been discussions among the parties and I think you might find there is unanimous consent for the following motion:

If we are going to have to change the Constitution, it must be (1620 ) for a good and sufficient reason. We have all heard the emotions of the minister of public works. I would respond that Canadians That not later than 15 minutes before the ordinary time of adjournment on Thursday, February 17, 1994, the Speaker shall interrupt any proceedings before the must feel that they are a part of this constitutional amendment. House and shall put, forthwith and successively, without any further debate or amendment, all questions necessary to dispose of the motion of the Minister of In closing, I would like to say that this motion is not just a National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs for the appointment of a Special simple motion to build a bridge. This is a motion to change the Joint Committee, (Government business, No. 8), and if any division be demanded such recorded division shall be deferred until Tuesday, February 22 at 3 p.m. fundamental document of how our country operates, the Consti- tution. The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu): Do we have unanimous consent? This is a bridge over the troubled waters of true Canadian democracy. Some hon. members: Agreed.

1397

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders Mr. George S. Rideout (Parliamentary Secretary to Minis- This is not just a five–year project and then it disappears. ter of Natural Resources): Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to There are tremendous spin–off benefits which are going to assist rise and speak on this particular issue again. While the issue in the tourism industry. Projections indicate that upwards of a 25 itself is a very tight one in the sense of dealing with constitution- per cent increase will be achieved in the tourism industry. al change, it is interesting to listen to some of the arguments about what a major issue of constitutional change this is. We will also see tremendous savings and I am sure that the Reform Party would like to support savings. We have heard It is simply substituting one method of linking Prince Edward members of the government side talk about the delays, trans- Island to Canada with another. While the wording that was portation costs. Any industry that is tied in to transportation as initially done was probably too restrictive we now have an part of the cost of doing business is going to be happy with this opportunity to correct that situation and yet we hear arguments project. I believe the estimate is something like $10 million that this is a major constitutional change which is going to shake annually that will be saved by people who are tied in to the the fabric of the nation. I must look at that with some chagrin transportation side of this problem. and state that this is not a fundamental constitutional argument. In addition, this project is going to create some very high tech This is simply whether we are going to change the method of jobs. We build one of these projects and we actually have a linking part of Canada’s inhabitants with the rest of Canada’s spin–off of high tech jobs both in the engineering side of things inhabitants. The term fixed link in my view is probably a bit of a and in the labouring side where people learn how to work on a misnomer as well. It conjures up causeways and tunnels and construction facility such as this one. linkages. This is a bridge, mind you a big bridge, but just a bridge and it is going to join Prince Edward Island with the rest of Canada. (1625)

We have used ferry service before and now we are going to use In that sense, we are going to have a double benefit, the short a bridge. I do not know why we are all uptight about the method term benefit of the actual construction and the long term benefit of linking Canadians with Canadians. in tourism. There will be savings in the area of transportation and also the development of new technology and an educated If we are going to argue some of the issues we have to be fair. I work force that will be able to export that knowledge and ability heard one of the members opposite talk about how the subsidy around the world. which is going to support the fixed link is going to be double the cost of the present subsidy. I say to those doomsayers who say that it is not time to go ahead and that we should rethink our position on this project, we What you have to factor into those numbers is a capital have been rethinking this thing for upwards of 35 to 40 years. It allocation that must go in with those numbers and therefore is time for some action. This is a project that Atlantic Canada when we actually compare subsidies of the fixed link and the made. It is going to benefit Atlantic Canada. I see the members ferry service they are equal opposite shaking their heads. They are more concerned with their region rather than helping Atlantic Canada to pull itself up We also have to face the reality that if we do not have the by its own boot straps. bridge we are going to need new ferries and there is a very large expenditure of moneys necessary to bring those ferries up to acceptable service over the next 35 years. I say to the hon. members, get on board, support this project and make Atlantic Canada one of the stronger participants in this Confederation. Do not try to keep us down on the farm or We are not comparing doing nothing with doing this particular locked up on the island. This is a minor constitutional change. It bridge project. needs your support not your negative talk. I think we also have to look at the situation and its impact on Atlantic Canada. The short term impact is great economic Mr. (Prince George—Peace River): Madam Speak- activity, spending large sums of money. We are going to see 70 er, I listened with interest to the hon. member’s statement. per cent of the procurement come from Atlantic Canada which is going to be beneficial to the people who right now have one of Being from British Columbia, I was just wondering if the hon. the largest levels of unemployment in the country. member could explain to the people of British Columbia, with Vancouver Island and all of the economic activity, population We are going to see 2,675 construction related jobs created in and traffic which has to travel back and forth between Vancouv- Atlantic Canada and that is going to be beneficial. Upwards of er Island and the mainland, how B.C. is able to sustain its 90 per cent of all labour will come from people who live or will economic activity and provide a good enough service with live in Atlantic Canada. ferries.

1398

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders I have no problem with the bridge if it is the most economic see the wisdom of the bridge, get on line and support the project. way to go about it, but I am not convinced that is the case. I gather that one of the benefits of being a Reformer is they can have free votes. Hopefully we will see a few of them come I would like the member to explain to the people of British across and support us on this very worthwhile project. Columbia how Vancouver Island can be serviced more than adequately with good ferry service but we need this fixed link [Translation] for Prince Edward Island. The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu): It is my duty, pursuant Mr. Rideout: Madam Speaker, the member opposite has to Standing Order 38, to inform the House that the questions to raised one of the unique things about Canada and that is that we be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the can have differences. Obviously the folks on Vancouver Island hon. member for Kamloops—Small Business; the hon. member like having the ferry service. Obviously the people of Prince for Wetaskiwin—House of Commons; the hon. member for Edward Island would rather have a bridge. Burnaby—Kingsway—Cruise Missile Testing; the hon. member for Hochelaga—Maisonneuve—Electronic Highway; the hon. I would say to the member that if at some point the people on member for Yukon—Health Care. Vancouver Island decide that they want to have a bridge they should approach their provincial government for one. [English] [Translation] Mr. Wayne Easter (Malpeque): Madam Speaker, I rise to speak in favour of this constitutional amendment which allows Mr. François Langlois (Bellechasse): Madam Speaker, I am the federal government to live up to the terms of the constitu- somewhat surprised at the way the debate is developing, espe- tional agreement with Prince Edward Island with a mode of cially when you consider that, during the election and 1992 transportation infrastructure that is geared to the year 2000 and referendum campaigns, the Reform Party was a staunch advo- beyond. cate of a Senate based on equality, political equality, which means equal representation for all provinces, including, we were told, Prince Edward Island. I want to make it clear at the beginning that the legislative assembly in Prince Edward Island unanimously adopted the However, there is also such a thing as economic equality. The necessary constitutional amendment in June of last year with the hon. member for St. Boniface made a brilliant presentation on full understanding the would proceed with the economic aspects, and arguments were made by government an amendment as soon as possible. Parliament is living up to its members as well as by some of my colleagues from the Bloc commitment and I am pleased by the amount of support from Quebecois. I really wonder what is going on? In the country that both sides of the House. Canada still is, why should some regions be treated differently on the basis of their population. It seems to me that some would Part of the reason for the support is that a lot of Canadians want to penalize Prince Edward Island on the ground that its off–island want to link up with us rather than the other way population of 120,000 or 130,000 does not justify building a link around. I encourage all members of Parliament to come to which has been the subject of so many studies, environmental Prince Edward Island before and after the fixed link is in place, assessments, reviews and even court decisions. Yet, if there is a spend a few of their hard earned dollars, have some of the best decision which was based on an extensive review of the situation potatoes grown in Canada; see some of scenery and have some in Atlantic Canada, it is probably this one. As far as I am of our lobster. I am getting a little off track blowing up the concerned, whether or not we like the idea of a bridge, a tunnel merits of our wonderful isle. We certainly want it to remain that. or some other fixed crossing between Prince Edward Island and the continent is irrelevant. This new bridge enters my riding at the community of Borden. I am well aware of the controversy past and present that (1630) surrounds the project. The impact of the construction and the completion of the fixed link will be felt first by the people in my The residents of Prince Edward Island have made a decision riding and most directly by the people in the community of which we must respect. Consequently I ask the hon. member: Borden. Why does he not want to respect the decision made by those who live on P.E.I.? The issue of the fixed link connecting P.E.I. has been under consideration at one time or another since 1885 when the [English] possibility of a tunnel connecting the island was first consid- ered. I do not mind admitting up front that first I favoured a Mr. Rideout: Madam Speaker, I agree with the comments of tunnel and I had to be convinced to favour a bridge. I will say the member opposite. The debate has taken a strange turn. that the evidence and public opinion now in Prince Edward Hopefully as it continues some of my colleagues opposite will Island is very strongly supportive of the bridge.

1399

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders

(1635 ) As well, we have to address the concerns of the community of Borden. That is happening on an ongoing basis. One of the last studies done looked at the specifics of the project relating to I have had a considerable amount of indirect involvement SCI’s bridge proposal and it passed the test. Justice Cullen of the with the Borden–Cape Tormentine ferry crossing. My father Federal Court stated the following in his ruling with respect to worked for CN Rail, later Marine Atlantic, as a deck hand and the efforts of Friends of the Island to prevent the project from eventually a quartermaster for 32 years on that crossing. From proceeding with respect to scientific studies and I think it is age 12, as many youth did, we would drive back and forth on the important to put that statement on the record: ‘‘The scientific car ferries. I have had first hand experience of the delays, of evidence relied on by Public Works Canada declared all environ- being stuck in the ice for as long as 18 hours. As a result of that mental impacts or potential environmental impacts were insig- experience I recognize the uniqueness of that particular area. nificant. Nowhere else in the world will one find the combination of wind, tides and ice there is where this bridge is going to be built. (1640 )

The respondent SCI and Public Works accepted those find- It is for those reasons that I had to be convinced and looked so ings, were correct in doing so and thus the decision of Public seriously at this project with a very critical eye. I have looked at Works was correct in law and certainly not made in a vacuum’’. the studies concerning the environment, the ice conditions, the fisheries, the socioeconomic impact and so on. This morning the Other members have spoken of the economic impact and minister outlined the number and breadth of the studies. I can spin–off so I will not repeat those facts and figures. However in tell the House of the very extensive public consultations on the long term after 1997 completion there should be economic Prince Edward Island of those studies and of the bridge. benefits, savings to transportation costs in the trucking industry and more reliable product delivery for our agriculture, fisheries and manufacturing products. After all transportation is neces- During the election campaign I found a sense of optimism as a sary in the delivery of goods to market. We have four years to go. result of the project, due to the fact that there would be an I mentioned in a question to a speaker earlier this afternoon expected increase in economic activity during construction and there are major concerns at the moment and major delays in improved transportation infrastructure following construction. getting our products to the marketplace. There were concerns, and I do not think we can sweep those under the rug, from the ferry workers, from the fishermen and The government has committed itself to ensuring that the from the people of Borden. We cannot brush them off. They are risks to the environment and the fishery are minimized. It has very real concerns in the minds of those people and must be committed itself to ensuring that any of Marine Atlantic’s work addressed. As a result of the studies, government has moved to force displaced by the completion of the bridge will be assisted address them in a number of areas. I want to put on the record the through retraining, relocation assistance and early retirement way they will be addressed. programs.

I want to touch on one final point. It is the growing sense As a result of the environmental review the government among some islanders that the link, combined with the possible determined that the construction and the presence of the bridge loss of air traffic control service on the island, could lead will result in no significant impact on the environment and the progressively toward a diminishing sense of full provincial fishery. In order to overcome the difficulty the developer has status. We may need at some point a full review of the trans- been required to set aside $10 million as a compensation fund. portation infrastucture throughout the Atlantic region, one that This fund will be administered according to the terms and will allow all the stakeholders to participate in developing a process currently being developed by a fisheries liaison com- system that will benefit the region going into the next century. mittee composed of a majority of fishermen. In conclusion, this project is an investment in our future. This amendment is part of the process to allow that to happen. Quite a number of Marine Atlantic ferry workers will lose their jobs. That is reality. The government has made the commit- Mr. Lee Morrison (Swift Current—Maple Creek—Assini- ment that these employees will be treated fairly and equitably. boia): Madam Speaker, I am a little surprised because I know They will have first right of refusal for the bridge operation and the hon. member is quite an ardent economic nationalist. I now maintenance jobs. A fair severance package will be negotiated find him vigorously defending a project that is going to pour between the workers union and Marine Atlantic. The govern- hundreds of millions of dollars into the pockets of two giant ment will provide opportunities for retraining, and relocation multinational corporations. I find this a little inconsistent. assistance will be made available if necessary. A joint consulta- tive committee has been set up to co–ordinate the activities Earlier the subject of ice delays came up. I will agree with the dealing with the ferry workers. hon. member that one will get ice delays for ferries, even the

1400

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders best of them, that one would not get with a bridge. On the other Some hon. members: Agreed. hand, one will not get the sort of wind delays, winter or summer, with ferries that one will get with this bridge. Hon. Allan Rock (Minister of Justice and Attorney Gener- al of Canada): Madam Speaker, I am indebted to my colleagues The only bridge I am personally familiar with which is in any for their consent. way comparable is the one across the Straits of Mackinaw. It is often closed because it is impassable in bad weather conditions. I would like to take the opportunity this afternoon to respond By going a couple of hundred miles out of their way drivers can to concerns raised this morning in the course of this debate by get around but it is pretty hard to get around Northumberland the hon. Leader of the Opposition. He raised concerns arising Strait. Again I am trying to look at this from a practical, realistic from the translation and a possible different meaning between point of view. I would like the hon. member’s comment on that. the French and English texts of the constitutional amendment. Mr. Easter: Madam Speaker, in Prince Edward Island we The Department of Justice has now provided an opinion by those look at the investment and economic activity of this link project persons who are drafting experts in matters of this kind. in the very short term. It is the opinion of the Department of Justice that the French The minister outlined creating jobs this morning. He talked text and specifically the word ‘‘remplace’’ is in the subjunctive about 70 per cent procurement expenditures in the Atlantic area. tense and as such imports a possibility. In other words the Ninety–six per cent of the jobs will go to that area so there will French text, according to the Department of Justice, says be an economic boost in the initial stages of the project as a nothing more or less than the English text which reads: ‘‘may be result of the expenditure of funds. substituted’’.

Our concern in the study on ice was what ice could do to the I would like to thank the Leader of the Opposition for having bridge. We were assured by all the experts that the bridge will be raised the matter. We respect his concerns but we believe they able to withstand the pressure of that ice. are groundless. I appreciate this opportunity to clarify any possible misinterpretation. (1645) [Translation] The fishermen have another real concern: if the bridge delays the ice moving out of the strait it would have an impact on the Mr. Gilbert Fillion (Chicoutimi): Madam Speaker, I am lobster fishery in terms of the waters remaining cooler and the pleased to speak on this constitutional amendment which the lobsters therefore remaining dormant for a longer period of Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada and time. It would have an impact on lobsters. Minister for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency put Studies have clearly shown that the ice delay would be very forward under section 43 of the Constitution Act, 1982. limited and would have minimal effect, if any, on the lobster fishery. I am one of the last members scheduled to speak. I hope that the parliamentary secretary of the government party will listen Mr. Morrison: I rise on a point of order, Madam Speaker. The to what I have to say. While I will be going over some ground hon. member misunderstood my question. When I talked of ice that has already been covered, toward the end of my speech, I delay I meant delays to ferries due to the presence of ice in the will be voicing several opinions which subsequently will have to channel. I was not referring to delayed breakup of the ice. be analysed.

Mr. Easter: Madam Speaker, I will just make a comment on The amendment in question provides for a fixed crossing that. Certainly we are familiar with the ice delays to ferries these joining Prince Edward Island to the mainland to be substituted days. As I mentioned earlier this afternoon, truckers at the for the ferry service between Cape Tormentine and Borden. It moment are having anywhere from a three–hour to five–hour should be noted that one of the terms of Prince Edward Island’s extra wait due to a slowdown in ferry movement because of ice entry into Confederation was that efficient steam service for the congestion at the terminal and so many trucks moving. Under conveyance of mail and passengers be established and main- the current scenario with the ferries and the ice it becomes an tained between the Island and the mainland, winter and summer, extremely difficult situation in terms of getting product to thus placing the Island in continuous communication with the market on time and in an efficient way. Intercolonial Railway and the railway system of Canada. Mr. Rock: Madam Speaker, I wish to make a statement to the House and I wonder if I might have unanimous consent for that (1650) purpose. In 1873 the realization came about that the terms and condi- The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu): Is there unanimous tions for admission into Confederation, namely the promise of consent of the House? efficient steam service, were not being adhered to.

1401

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders In 1877 Ottawa agreed to pay a subsidy for the operation of a Since the debate began this morning we have heard the same steam ferry boat. The Northern Light was put into service in the speeches. However, the facts cannot be disputed. Northumberland Strait. The proposed bridge will be 13 kilometres long. This super- The idea of building a tunnel under the strait to maintain structure will replace the ferry service between Cape Tormen- year–round communication was first bandied about in the early tine, New Brunswick, and Borden, Prince Edward Island. 1880s. However, with the introduction of ice–breaking ferries in 1917–18, the problem of ensuring continuous communication (1655) was resolved and the idea of establishing what we now refer to as a fixed link was abandoned for the moment. Only then were It is a fact that the province was given guarantees under the ferries pressed into service twelve months of the year. Constitution regarding links with the continent. Today, a ferry service is provided by Marine Atlantic, a Crown corporation. The amendment in question provides for a fixed crossing Responsibility for financing, building and operating a bridge joining Prince Edward Island to the mainland to be substituted connecting New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island was given for the ferry service between Cape Tormentine and Borden. to Strait Crossing Development, a Canadian company. The company will receive an annual federal subsidy of $41.9 million Let me start by saying that it is rather significant that we find in 1992 dollars, this amount to be indexed for 35 years, starting ourselves having to debate a constitutional amendment, since in 1997. This works out to a total of nearly $1.5 billion. The the present government refuses to discuss any amendments to company obtained financing through a private bond issue worth the Constitution which, as noted in section 52 of the Constitu- $660 million. The bonds have a triple–A rating, the best tion Act, 1982, is the supreme law of Canada. guarantee the banks can have.

In a famous ruling, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Although I agree with this amendment, since we are bound by Council in London compared the Canadian Constitution to a tree one of the terms of union under which Prince Edward Island capable of growing within its natural confines. History has entered Confederation in 1873, I nevertheless have some reser- proven otherwise. It has taken more than a century for us to get vations about the project. The cost of the ferry service operated around to debating here in the House the construction of a fixed today by Marine Atlantic, a Crown corporation, is around $28 link between New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island. million. There are some substantial differences here. The bridge subsequently becomes the property of the federal government. The agreement provides that the federal government will ac- As much as we want to muzzle debate on the Constitution, the quire ownership of the bridge in 2032. In what condition will the subject keeps coming up because it is part of an evolving bridge be at that point? That is certainly a question we can process. A country is not frozen in time. It is constantly address in the House. Does the government have sufficient evolving. The constitutional amendment sought under section guarantees that the bridge will be handed over in good condition 43 of the Constitution Act, 1982, is an integral part of section 38 and that it will not have to invest in extending its useful life? and subsequent sections which set out the process for amending the Canadian Constitution. We cannot help but recall 1982 and the painful memories it conjures up for Quebec. We cannot help During the first year, tolls will equal the rate charged for the but remember the rejection of the Meech Lake Accord and the ferry, which is $11.05. Subsequently, increases should not rejection by all Canadians of the Charlottetown Accord. exceed 75 per cent of the rate of inflation. The promoter will collect the toll fees. At this point, one wonders whether this is a firm commitment or whether the door is still open for renego- This amendment put forward by the government shows us that tiating rates if traffic remains below the forecast levels. constitutional talks cannot be relegated to the back burner and that it is impossible to artificially stop a process which, by Economic spin–offs will include about 2,675 person–years of definition, is constantly evolving. work during construction, or 900 to 1,000 jobs annually with a construction season of about nine months. As we said earlier, 96 This constitutional amendment will put Prince Edward Island per cent of the labour force will be from Atlantic Canada. in contact with the mainland through the establishment of a However, what will happen after completion of the project? Is it fixed link. And I am very happy for island residents. back to the vicious circle of unemployment insurance and welfare? Will tourist revenues be sufficient to prevent this? Representatives of the federal government and Strait Cross- ing Development Inc., an international consortium, have signed The government admits that about 420 permanent employees a contract valued at $840 million for the construction of a with Marine Atlantic will lose their jobs when the bridge is bridge. It will cost approximately $800 million to build the opened to traffic and that only 60 jobs will be created. This bridge, while $40 million will go to cover interest charges means a net loss of about 360 jobs. Further costs are expected, during the three–year construction period. including negotiating service allowances and funding for

1402

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders retraining and relocation, if necessary. We do not have the cient co–ordination of monitoring of industrial benefits must be answers to these questions yet. put in place; environmental damage must be kept to a minimum throughout the project and the rights of the fishermen must be (1700) preserved during the entire process. We, in the Bloc Quebecois, hope that the minister will take It will cost $10 million to compensate fishermen. A federal– into consideration the points I have just raised and, in the near provincial agreement respecting the construction of the fixed future, respond favourably in this House to the suggestion of crossing was entered into by the Government of Canada and the setting up a special House committee, as major investments are provinces of Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick. at stake and it is essential to monitor carefully the use made of Canadian taxpayers’ money and hopefully preserve steady, Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick will each receive structuring and paying jobs for the young people. $20.4 million toward upgrading their road system. Is equal treatment to be expected for all of Canada? Finally, the commu- (1705) nities of Borden and Cape Tormentine will receive a special development fund of up to $20 million. Mr. Benoît Serré (Timiskaming—French River): Madam Speaker, first, I would like to congratulate the members of the Some 70 per cent of the construction materials for the bridge Official Opposition, the Bloc Quebecois, on the facility with will be purchased in Prince Edward Island. The delivery of fish which they turn any subject discussed here in the House to their and farm products will no doubt improve. Tourism is expected to advantage and bring it around to the only debate that concerns increase by 25 per cent. Are these estimates based on genuine them, their only goal and objective, which is independence and studies, studies demonstrating the feasibility of this project? the separation of Quebec. And the island’s shipping industry will save $10 million a year according to the Liberal Party. I doubt it. Some hon. members: Hear, hear.

Of course, we must not overlook the effects of building such a Mr. Serré: I am glad that they applaud when I talk about structure will have on shipping, wildlife, fish, migratory birds, separation and independence, because I see that you are sending agriculture and ice. a clear, unambiguous message: Quebec independence is what you want, not Quebec sovereignty. I am glad to see the reaction God forbid that this project become another Hibernia, a of my hon. colleagues in the Bloc Quebecois. project which has swallowed up in excess of $1 billion in public and private funds to date, for the federal government contribu- They have that knack and I see the rationalization they used tion to that project presented some fundamental flaws as the for approving this project. They said, ‘‘Because there was a Auditor General pointed out in his 1992 report. He described the plebiscite in Prince Edward Island, we must respect the will of Hibernia project as high–risk due to the uncertainty of prices as the people’’. They draw a parallel with a future referendum in well as technological and environmental factors. We hope that Quebec. I would like to make a distinction. the construction of the bridge will not be plagued with the same problems. The project in question is a bridge, a link, something to unite Canada and build Canada, something constructive. The eventual With regard to the bridge project, Parliament and more referendum in Quebec is a plan to destroy bridges and ties in this importantly the public should be provided with quality reports country. These people do not want a constitutional amendment; throughout the project so that corrective action can be taken they want the outright destruction of our country, and I will immediately, as required. A work schedule should be submitted never agree to that. to Parliament and a special House committee should follow the progress made in all areas—financing, construction per se, Mr. Fillion: Madam Speaker, I must sincerely tell you that I deadlines, environmental studies—and report to the House at thank the hon. member for his comment. Throughout the elec- specific times. tion campaign—and it was publicized in English Canada and in French Canada, in Quebec and elsewhere—we said that while The Bloc Quebecois believes that taking these comments into we were here in the House, the Bloc Quebecois’s mandate was to consideration and supporting this amendment will take care of a prepare for Quebec sovereignty. long–standing request. I hope that the Prince Edward Island bridge project is built on solid ground because we will be the Some hon. members: Hear, hear. rightful owners of this infrastructure 35 years from now. Mr. Fillion: We did not refrain from saying and explaining To be a good deal, this project must be accompanied by a that during the election campaign. Our leader and other mem- comprehensive set of clear and measurable objectives; suffi- bers are ready to explain this position throughout Canada.

1403

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders Our action and our position today is not to destroy what exists for the population of Prince Edward Island. It goes without but to ensure that there is some fairness. There was something saying that we respect the outcome of any referendum. After all, unfair about Prince Edward Island’s treatment. Today, we are we nationalists accepted the verdict in 1980 when Quebec’s trying to repair that error which has lasted over 100 years. So we National Assembly, which was the first one in the country to are also seeking this same fairness for the province of Quebec in pass legislation on such public consultations, held its referen- various fields and social areas from the federal government. I dum. think that is what our distinguished members on the government side do not like; for once, the voice of Quebec is being heard in That verdict was not favourable to us, but in a democracy, win this House defending and safeguarding its interests and giving or lose, you must accept the decision of a public vote. Conse- all of Canada clear, precise, unambiguous positions. quently, we accept the decision made by the people of Prince Edward Island. In the next few years, when Quebec holds a The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu): Therefore, I give the referendum to democratically decide its future, I hope that the floor to the hon. member for Davenport, for a question or a hon. member, as well as all the members opposite, will accept comment. the result of that democratic process. Mr. Caccia: No, Madam Speaker, I would like to make a Mr. Fillion: Madam Speaker— speech. The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu): We are not going to have The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu): In that case I cannot a debate between two members of the same party. Do you have a give you the floor. brief comment? Mr. Ménard: Madam Speaker, I would like to make a Mr. Gilbert Fillion (Chicoutimi): Madam Speaker, I will comment. make a brief comment since I realize the time for questions and comments is about to expire. The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu): Certainly but are you in your seat? I would like to ask the parliamentary secretary to consider the questions I raised in my speech. I do not want to turn this into a I am sorry. I do not want to make fun of you, but you must nationalist debate. I am sure that the Department of Public speak from your seat. Twice already members have spoken when Works will look at each of these issues and try to deal with them, they were not where they should have been. and that a special committee of the House will be appointed to An hon. member: He is where he is supposed to be. monitor the entire project. Mr. Réal Ménard (Hochelaga—Maisonneuve): Madam * * * Speaker, I have never been so properly told off. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE (1710) Hon. Fernand Robichaud (Secretary of State (Parliamen- I want to comment on the excellent speech by our colleague. I tary Affairs)): Madam Speaker, I wish to confirm what the could not help making the link with the speech of the previous government House leader announced last Thursday, that tomor- speaker. row, February 16, will be an allotted day. The Order Paper will reflect this designation. I imagine that if we, the Official Opposition, had done any kind of filibustering regarding this motion, which is so impor- * * * tant for the quality of life of Prince Edward Island residents, we would have been criticized and accused of being anti–democrat- [English] ic, of not respecting the result of the referendum, and of refusing to promote the democratic process in this country. PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND FIXED LINK Now that we are co–operating with the government, and I The House resumed consideration of the motion. think it takes some audacity to rise in this House to say that, because we are co–operating with the government, we are Hon. Charles Caccia (Davenport): Madam Speaker, to branded as being biased and anti–democratic and as wanting to improve the movement of people to and from beautiful Prince side–track the debate. Edward Island it seems to me there is an alternative which is safer, environmentally preferable and less expensive than the We must be clear, and this is essentially what the previous proposed bridge. It is an alternative that would create more jobs speaker meant. There cannot be two types of democracies in this in the long term. That alternative is an improved ferry service. country: one which suits English Canada and government mem- bers, and one which suits the government. Let me outline the advantages of improving the ferry service versus building a bridge 14 kilometres long which in winter and The support of the Official Opposition is clearly meant to early spring would mean keeping a passage open under very convince the government to make the decision it should make difficult climatic conditions.

1404

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders An improved ferry service would cost an estimated $36 ably close: 51 per cent voted in favour, 46 per cent voted for the million a year. That includes the continual replacement of improved ferry service, and 3 per cent expressed an undecided vessels and building a capital fund for making the ferry replace- position. ment fund sustainable. (1720) (1715 ) Before concluding it is important to make a brief reference to By contrast, the proposed bridge would cost $42 million a studies related to environmental impacts. The studies that have year for 35 years which, if my mathematics are correct, would been quoted and used were conducted by the proposing depart- amount to $1.47 billion. The difference between the two ap- ment, namely the Department of Public Works. When an envi- proaches amounts to a saving of some $210 million over 35 ronmental assessment panel was formed and reported it years in favour of the improved ferry service. recommended against the idea of the bridge. Its recommenda- tions were disregarded. Also there is the question of additional road construction. The improved ferry service will not require such expenditures. Those of us here today who believe in the increasing impor- However, by contrast, the bridge will require an expenditure of tance of environmental impact assessment believe it incumbent some $41 million. That is another saving amounting to $41 that at least a panel be appointed to examine the whole proposal million. again, to point out the weaknesses of the bridge and to determine Then there is the compensation to the towns of Borden and whether the feasibility of the proposal is such to warrant it Cape Tormentine. The improved ferry service would not require proceeding. such compensation but, by contrast, the bridge requires an estimated $20 million for the link. The continued ferry service What worries me considerably about this proposal is what does not require compensation to municipalities. This is another will happen 35 years after the completion of the construction of saving amounting to the $20 million I just mentioned. the bridge when the private consortium will retire and the bridge will become public property. Obviously the structure will be If we add all these items the ferry option would result in eroded; salt water has that effect. The public will inherit a saving some $271 million without taking into account cost structure to maintain which most likely will require consider- overruns estimated to be as high as $550 million and without able repairs, and that after the public having spent or invested taking into account unemployment insurance plus training and some $1.47 billion over the next 35 years for the construction of relocation of ferry workers for an estimated total of some $25 the bridge. A corroded structure is what the next generation of million. politicians and decision makers is likely to inherit and what the Canadian public is likely to have to cope with. Having compared the financial aspect let me briefly compare the question of jobs. During the next 35 years, in the case of the For all these reasons I believe the alternative of an improved improved ferry system there are likely to be some 8,200 person ferry system would be more desirable and in the public interest. years in jobs that could be created in the form of refitting and building new ferries. By contrast, during that same period the [Translation] bridge would generate only 2,400 person years in terms of construction jobs. Mr. Ghislain Lebel (Chambly): Madam Speaker, I get the feeling that the party to which I belong caught the government After the 35–year period and once the bridge has been party by surprise in deciding to support the amendment before completed the job picture would be as follows. The improved the House today. I get the feeling that the government party was ferry service would provide an estimated 400 year–round jobs counting on the opposition of the Bloc Quebecois, and possibly and an additional 325 summer operating jobs. These figures even that of the Reform Party, to withdraw a proposal that it did were provided by the union. By contrast, the bridge after not care greatly for. The comments of the hon. member who just completion would provide only an estimated 60 to 80 operating spoke lead me to believe this is so. jobs. In essence the emerging employment picture is very much in favour of the improved ferries alternative because it would I think the government party, the Liberal Party, made prom- provide more jobs than the proposed bridge, namely 5,800 more ises to Maritimers, particularly to the residents of Prince person years during the next 35 years, an estimated 340 more Edward Island, in an attempt to win votes, 125,000 votes to be jobs in winter and an estimated 645 more jobs thereafter in exact, not an insignificant number. In making this promise they summer. were hoping that the other parties in the House would not support them. I think they were caught a little off guard when we On the democratic process used in arriving at the decision to supported them. I would like to ask the hon. member who just build the bridge, the public was consulted on a link which many spoke if he was trying to extricate himself from this matter understood to mean a tunnel or a bridge. A consultation on the honourably by recommending a ferry when his party, his minis- construction of the bridge did not take place. Actually my ter and the minister’s parliamentary secretary all seem to favour understanding is that the vote on this consultation was consider- a fixed crossing. I wonder if the government party could tell the

1405

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders opposition if it wants a bridge, yes or no? We are not sure any have heard that 70 per cent of procurement requirements will be more. filled in Atlantic Canada.

(1725) We have also heard that tourism will be increased—and I say in respect to my colleague from Davenport that tourism should Mr. Caccia: Madam Speaker, I am surprised that the hon. be considered in this respect—by about 30 per cent during the member feels somewhat confused or does not understand that period of the bridge construction and about 25 per cent thereaf- the Liberal Party, in keeping with a tradition of allowing ter. This is a significant economic stimulus for a province and an freedom of thought and opinion, has agreed to an open, honest area which has suffered greatly in the past decades. debate on an issue of public importance such as this one. I would (1730) hope that the same spirit of openness prevails within his party. Certain members of the Bloc, notably the distinguished environ- One of the members opposite mentioned that the project was ment critic, had the opportunity and were able to express their supported by a plebiscite in 1988, six years ago. We have also opinion freely this afternoon, particularly on such issues as heard requests for consultation. Surely six years and 80 public sustainable development and environmental protection. meetings is adequate consultation.

I listened with a great deal of interest to the hon. member We heard other members from Prince Edward Island, includ- whose position is similar, if you will, to my own. The views he ing the member for Egmont, say there are waiting times of three has expressed will enrich the debate taking place in the House to five hours for the ferries. It affects transportation to the this afternoon. island. We also heard the hon. member for Halifax describe how she had to party for seven hours on a ferry that could not get Mr. René Laurin (Joliette): Madam Speaker, this will be a across the water. brief comment, just to tell the member of the government party: These are all impressive arguments which have convinced me good for them if they are free to express themselves without without question that this proposition should be supported. necessarily following the party line. However, within the Bloc Quebecois, we had a consensus before the election. We knew I come from the province of Ontario as do many other beforehand on what we agreed and disagreed. We solved our members on this side. My province through its support of the problems before; then when we came here, we came as a bloc general revenue will support this project. I have heard several and today we think as a bloc. comments today which made me think that in this kind of basic proposition where we share responsibilities, it is not always So if the party in power had thought about it before, perhaps recognized. you could have made promises that would have seemed more sincere to your constituents and today you would not need to Someone suggested this particular project affected all parts of appear divided. Canada because of its need for constitutional amendment and the general revenues of Canada would be used and therefore it Mr. Caccia: I am not aware that in the programs of the Bloc should be subject to the interests of all of Canada. That member Quebecois before the election, all members of the party had who comes from the province of British Columbia should recall taken a position in favour of building the bridge. But if such a there have been many items of this kind in the past, including a position was indeed taken, I would be very glad to see it, if the case in the province of British Columbia. member wants to show it to me one of these days. When British Columbia entered Confederation there was an [English] agreement in the terms of union for British Columbia that a railway would be built with subsidies amounting to $50 million, Mr. John English (Parliamentary Secretary to President of enormous sums at that time equal to the total general revenue of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Canada. That is in the Constitution, just of course as the ferries Intergovernmental Affairs): Madam Speaker, I am speaking were in 1873. today in support of this resolution not because I am following We have an obligation along these same lines. When a the party line. However I listened with great interest to the constitutional amendment which so clearly affects a single remarks of my colleagues. It is an indication our party is willing province or two provinces in this case, for the sake of the to accept a diversity of viewpoint. I am not affected in my efficiency of the Constitution such bilateral amendments should decision because I sit beside the hon. member for Halifax and proceed without requiring even more protracted consultation or the hon. member for Egmont who are speaking strongly in negotiation in the constitutional realm. support of the resolution. The people of Prince Edward Island have waited a long time What we have heard today in the debate reflects a very good for a bridge. We heard from one hon. member earlier that it was argument for the fixed link and for the constitutional amend- over 100 years ago in the 1880s when a fixed link of a certain ment. In terms of jobs we have heard that the proposal will kind was first proposed. It was again proposed in the 1950s and create 5,300 jobs over a period of three years. Moreover, we 1960s. In those cases it did not come to fruition. Many other

1406

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders things did in that period, including the CPR and the transconti- As some hon. members have pointed out, the subsidy will be nental railways. It would seem they were not in the best interests larger than the current one, but it would be no more than the cost of Prince Edward Island. of replacing the ferries.

Finally, it is important to carry out the long term commit- If Prince Edward Island has 138,000 people as someone ments that have been made to Prince Edward Island to link that referred to earlier, that is a population larger than that of the part of Canada with this part in the most modern and efficient province of Saskatchewan or part of the Northwest Territories way possible. It seems to me this proposal meets those obliga- when the commitment was made to build the CPR or the Grand tions. Trunk Pacific or other railways. Mr. Jake E. Hoeppner (Lisgar—Marquette): Madam Speaker, I am very interested in the comments the hon. member I do not think it stands simply because the population is of the made about efficiency. I wonder if he is aware that water freight order of 130,000 that this is an enclave and that long term is ten times as efficient as truck or highway. Where is the cost of commitments this country has made to that wonderful island efficiency coming from by moving products from the island to the mainland? should not be honoured in the most modern ways possible. It seems to me this is a very modern way of recognizing the Has the member done any cost study on how much extra will commitment we made to maintain a communication–transporta- be spent in moving produce from the island to the mainland? tion link with Prince Edward Island. Mr. English: Madam Speaker, I have not done any studies but I am aware that water transportation is much cheaper for much This morning I toured the Department of External Affairs and longer distances. However I would say that anyone who has saw the communications system it is replacing at very great waited for a ferry as opposed to crossing a bridge knows one is a cost. I was reminded by the person leading the tour that this great deal easier and more efficient than the other. simply has to be done. It is essential because the link with the rest of the world has to be as modern as possible. Here too we We heard personal accounts from some hon. members who have no choice. Indeed we have a greater obligation, a moral have had to wait for ferries. We heard about the three to five hour obligation to go through with this project. waits and other complaints about the ferry service. Currently it is not efficient. I do not think we are living up to our obligation that was first made in 1873 and has been made several times In summary this fixed link will provide a stimulus to the since then. economy of the province that currently requires the largest amount of federal government subsidy per capita. It will create Mr. Lee Morrison (Swift Current—Maple Creek—Assini- jobs. It will give an economic boost in procurement, in direct boia): Madam Speaker, the hon. member made reference to the jobs and in long term tourism jobs. inconvenience of waiting for ferries. I have waited for lots of ferries. I have also waited for bridges to be opened when they were closed because of the weather. It did not make any difference. It was just as inconvenient and just as uncomfortable (1735) waiting for one as waiting for the other.

We all know about Prince Edward Island from Anne of Green The hon. member made reference to tourism. If this is going to be such a boon to tourism, I wonder why tourism operators on Gables. All of us should have the benefit of visiting that the island are campaigning to keep the Caribou Point ferry wonderful and unique part of Canada. In the case of tourism this operating even if the bridge is built. They believe the tourists country is running a deficit on the current account of about $10 want tourism. They do not want just to get from point a to point b billion. This is an extraordinarily large deficit, one that costs us like a load of Prince Edward Island potatoes going to market; enormously over the long term. Prince Edward Island is one part they enjoy the ferry. That was actually brought to my attention of Canada where tourism has been successful. With this bridge it by a study done by a noted economist from the maritimes, Dr. will be even more successful. Peter Townley from Acadia University who has panned this monument to vanity at every opportunity.

For that reason I believe the project taken in the longest (1740 ) term—and here I dissent from the view of my colleague from Davenport—is economically sensible and feasible. The benefits Mr. English: Madam Speaker, I too have waited for ferries will be indirect and long term but they are important to the and have waited to cross bridges. However, studies in this case people of Prince Edward Island. have indicated that it is more efficient.

1407

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders On the question of tourism, while it may be true that in I do not want to dwell on constitutional issues. I believe the specific places there may be some thought that a ferry crossing fiscal crunch facing Canada is the priority for most Canadians. I is a tourist event of some significance, one does not, to quote the would like to make my address primarily on the fiscal aspects of hon. member’s words, feel like a sack of potatoes on a ferry. I this project and the priorization we as Canadians and we as would think the majority of tourists would dissent from that members of Parliament need to expose ourselves to. view. Megaprojects are wonderful. They grab headlines. A mega- It certainly seems to be true that the people of Prince Edward project was completed in my riding. It had been promised for Island dissent from that view. There will be more tourism. There many elections before it was completed. Finally in the 1988 will be more economic activity. All of the studies seem to election it was promised and actually was completed, at consid- confirm that view. The people of Prince Edward Island ex- erably more cost than was projected I might add. In fact pressed that view in the plebiscite. governments have been trying to opt out of funding this mega- project because they were not able to meet the estimated cost of In that respect the hon. member may have a particular case, the project. However megaprojects do grab headlines. They are but it is not the general case. vote getters and attention getters. Unfortunately tax relief for the middle class does not seem to Mr. Elwin Hermanson (Kindersley—Lloydminster): Mad- be as popular. It does not seem to get the headlines. Therefore am Speaker, it is indeed a privilege to participate in this debate politicians and governments tend to forget about that aspect on the amendment to the Canadian Constitution as it relates to when projecting the business of this House and introducing the Prince Edward Island terms of union. orders and bills.

I have had two occasions to visit Prince Edward Island. My A few thousand very costly jobs seem to be quite an attention stays were not long enough. The first time I arrived by air and getter. From what I am able to determine the cost of each job the second time I arrived on the island by ferry. created, and these are just temporary jobs by the way, is approximately $310,000 per person year. That is a pretty rich The island is beautiful. The residents of Prince Edward Island plan if you ask me. have much to be proud of. There are a lot of farmers on the island. Earlier we heard from the hon. member for Malpeque However long term low unemployment as a strategy does not whom I notice has the same problem as I do in that he forgets to seem to be attainable by this government. It seems to be a much button up his jacket when he is speaking before the House. It lower priority. Oftentimes it seems to be forgotten. We all know must be a weakness of those of us who have earned our living by that the private sector is the job creator and the way to create farming. I would also just mention that the best bowl of clam jobs is to reduce the tax burden on our private and small chowder I have ever had was in Charlottetown, Prince Edward businesses so they can generate jobs and lower the unemploy- Island. ment situation which is intolerably high.

I am not opposed to Charlottetown. I am not opposed to Prince (1745) Edward Island. I am not opposed to building and I am not even opposed to this project in principle. However I believe it is time Hibernia is another megaproject—no problem. As an atten- to look at the process, to look at cost and to assess whether this is tion getter, a vote buyer it is going ahead. However, can we put a the right decision for Canada at this time. cap on federal spending? No, that is just unreasonable. We have to forget that. Some constitutional issues have been brought forward by other speakers, particularly from our caucus. I totally concur I believe it is time that the government laid out in frank terms with the member for Calgary West who questioned why this was its priorities to all Canadians. We have had a lot of motherhood such an important issue but Senate reform had to be put on the and apple pie stuff. A lot of it is in the famous red book. The back burner. naked truth is that as a nation we are over $500 billion in debt. That is over half a trillion dollars in debt and it is not a time Senate reform seems to be taboo in the House as far as the when we can say we would like to do this or that. Rather, it is a government is concerned, while amendments to the Constitution time of deciding what we must do to maintain a reasonable that affect Prince Edward Island, that have affected New Bruns- standard of living and pass on a heritage to our children of which wick in relation to language laws in the last Parliament seem to they can be truly proud. be no problem whatsoever. The discussion on property rights in this House seems to be taboo and cannot be brought forward. It is time that we as leaders of our country must listen to However the principle of aboriginal self–government seems to Canadians to find out what their priorities are and then try to be quite appropriate and has been discussed at length in this represent those priorities in this House in the legislation we House. support and in the decisions we make.

1408

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders For the past few years Reformers have been listening very structure which I can live and prosper within and make reason- closely to Canadians to try to determine what those priorities able profits for my business. might be. We think we have come pretty close to sensing what Canadians feel is important and what they would be prepared to Canada is facing this fiscal crisis and if we as individuals see go by the way, at least for the time being. After all, I would were in exactly the same situation we would be very prudent to remind this House that our caucus has grown from one member make wise decisions. Unfortunately, governments do not always to 52. That was no small feat and no accident. It came from makes those types of wise decisions. Quite often they are listening to Canadians and accurately representing their con- thinking about buying a yacht rather than keeping up with the cerns in the election and we are responsible to also represent mortgage payments. As the Canadian government, we must not those concerns in this House. only maintain the mortgage payments but we need to reduce the deficit so that the mortgage does not become totally uncontrol- Let me presume that the priorities of Canadians are also the lable. priorities of Canadians on Prince Edward Island. I know that my comments do not remain in this assembly. The people of Prince (1750) Edward Island are watching me. I am not concerned about that because I think the aspirations of the people of Prince Edward That deficit and that debt also affect the residents of Prince Island are not that different than the aspirations of most Cana- Edward Island and I am sure that if they have a bridge that the dians. I want to talk about the priorities that I believe are the country cannot afford to maintain, if they have an economy that priorities of the residents of Prince Edward Island. does not justify the use of that facility, it will be a sorry day and a difficult thing to explain to future generations. I know that most Canadians place a high priority on health care. I would just like to relate a little about what is happening in These are types of illustrations that we as Canadians need to my own province of Saskatchewan. We had governments that hear if we are going to make wise decisions. We do not want the liked to build monuments, that liked to build hospitals. We International Monetary Fund making those decisions for us. We probably have more hospitals per capita in our province than in do not want it lowering our credit rating, increasing the cost of any other part of Canada. Unfortunately, we now have no money borrowing all these dollars that we need if governments are to operate those hospitals. Our priorities were probably wrong. going to continue funding megaprojects when we are past the In fact, I am sure they were wrong. half–trillion dollar bench mark.

I wonder if the residents of Prince Edward Island would trade I do not want to carry on too much longer in sort of a gloom away their health care system to have a bridge to the mainland. It and doom approach. I do not think it is time to be down on is an interesting thought and I have not heard that thought being ourselves but I do believe it is time to make wise decisions as represented by members on the opposite side. Canadians.

Also, there is concern for the need for funding of ongoing As Reformers we talked to Canadians and said that we feel education, particularly post–secondary education. It is impor- governments have to cut spending and one area is megaprojects. tant for young people in every province of Canada, including We received broad support for that position right across the Prince Edward Island. country. Even in Atlantic Canada we received quite a bit of support even though we were fairly new and unknown in that part of the country. Do we want to build a bridge for the young people of Prince Edward Island so they can drive across that bridge and go into We preached the same message of fiscal responsibility, of the United States to find quality post–secondary education? Or placing our priorities on the things that are really important such are we going to place a high priority on education within our as health and education, care for our seniors and hope for our own country even if it means not expending funds to build a young people. bridge from New Brunswick to the island? We do not want to erode our reputation of being a country with I think of quality of life for our senior citizens. I would like to a high standard of living, one that properly cares for its citizens ask senior citizens if they would be prepared to trade their and one that meets the most important needs of Canadians. Canada pension plan for a bridge or financial security in retirement years for another megaproject. These are the types of Mr. Len Taylor (The Battlefords—Meadow Lake): Madam decision, the types of priorities we need to weigh in our minds. Speaker, I very much appreciate the opportunity to be able to enter the debate here today on this important resolution of the Being a small business person, a farmer, I have to weigh the House, an amendment to the Constitution of Canada relating to benefits of seeing megaprojects go forward or seeing a tax Prince Edward Island’s terms of union.

1409

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders It will allow for a fixed crossing joining the island to the passed by this Chamber, was really one of the very last acts of mainland. For greater certainty, as I quote from the motion the previous government before it adjourned for the summer before the House, nothing prevents the imposition of tolls for recess that eventually ended up in a federal election and the the use of such a fixed crossing between the island and the election of a new government. mainland, or the private operation of such a crossing. The record of the previous government on the environment The debate today is of great interest to me for several reasons, left a tremendous amount to be desired. I am quite surprised that one of which is that I have a great affinity for the island, an the new government would pick up exactly where the old affinity that goes back to several visits I have made to the island, government left off, especially on a project in which the one several by ferry and several by air. The people of Prince Edward single federal environmental assessment review of a general Island are very kind and generous who care an awful lot not only nature on this project called for the shutdown of this particular about their own island but about Confederation and about this project, the bridge. I will come to more of that in just a second. country. I want to acknowledge that I believe something has to be done All members of this House recognize that not all islanders are with regard to the access to Prince Edward Island, to improve in favour of the fixed link. There are many people who have the access to and from the island for products, for tourists and earned their living off the water as fishers, people in the for residents. Northumberland Strait, and also islanders who enjoy their way of life on the farm, a good, quiet rural way of life. They are quite When Bill C–110 was in the House, an act respecting the satisfied with the ferry service. Northumberland crossing that gave the go ahead to proceed with the construction prior to this constitutional change, the debate in I was very pleased today to be in the Chamber when the the House was characterized by Mr. Jim Fulton, then the member for Davenport spoke eloquently about the alternatives member from Skeena, who had quite a number of things to say. that the government has chosen to ignore. One alternative in particular calls for an updated ferry service that would allow for I would like to reiterate for the benefit of the House some of the prevention of some of the environmental problems that the the things that Mr. Fulton had to say. Mr. Fulton was a long time fixed link proposes. environment critic for the . As such, Mr. Fulton served our party and our nation very well. This speech on Bill C–110 at the time was almost Mr. Fulton’s last intervention (1755 ) in this House prior to his retirement. One could tell from the way he approached this issue how important it was to him and how That is partly the other reason why I am pleased to speak important he thought the environmental assessment process was today. The whole issue of environmental assessment is one that I to this country. have spent a great deal of time working on in the previous Parliament and something that is of great concern to me. As I had previously stated and argued very strongly at the time, the bridge was never assessed by a public panel. All of the The member for Davenport spoke about the need to take into studies that the government has talked about, the 90 or 91 account what environmental assessment means when consider- studies, were done in a sense by vested interests in the Northum- ing the future of major projects that will be discussed and taken berland Strait and in the bridge construction. The environmental care of in our country. assessment review process that I have supported very strongly in the development of a new Canadian environmental assessment We have many major projects under way in this country that act would require independently financed environmental assess- have not been subjected to environmental assessments and ment for projects such as this. others that when they have been assessed under strict environ- mental guidelines have been found to be substantially inade- (1800) quate. Mr. Fulton referred to the bridge never having been assessed The point that I will come to very shortly in my remarks by a public panel. As I indicated a few minutes ago, when the concerns the failure of the previous government and now environmental assessment review office took a look at a general apparently this government in dealing with this process of concept of it the generic bridge concept was turned down. instituting an environmental assessment process that will ensure that we have an adequate response to the needs of the environ- The Federal Court ordered that there be no irrevocable ment on projects such as the Northumberland Strait bridge. decisions by government until the provisions of the environ- mental assessment review process had been met. Members will I hesitate to mention the name of the previous Prime Minister recall that prior thereto EARP had also been avoided in the in this place. Bill C–110, the act respecting the Northumberland Kemano project. The Federal Court also found that in the crossing, an act debated in this House in June of last year and Kemano II project the government had acted both illegally and

1410

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders unconstitutionally. We had hoped to avoid that situation with the done by an independent agency free from political pressure or Northumberland link project. Of course that has not happened. influence peddling. The decision should be final and binding.

I want to raise as well, thanks to some of the notes Mr. Fulton It really does not strike me as unusual, but it is indicative of set out in the Chamber in June, the case of the Oldman River what is happening that a constitutional amendment dealing with dam. When we look at that project who do we find there but SCI, a structure affecting the environment and others is introduced in the very same company involved with the fixed link. When it the Chamber by the minister of public works whose department came to damming the Oldman River, SCI joined with the has most influence over the project and specifically wants the Government of Alberta and the federal Conservative Party at the project to be completed. time in fighting against the public every step of the way until the highest court in the land eventually had to rule that there must be If anything, the project should be viewed as an environmental an environmental assessment of that project. project as opposed to an economic one. The government should not be treating it as another economic project. When the assessment took place it ordered that the dam be taken down, that it was neither economically nor environmental- (1805 ) ly sound. The same company that did not believe in an environ- mental assessment process in that case has not been If we wish to create jobs in Prince Edward Island or northern participating in a public environmental assessment process on Saskatchewan, we could find all sorts of things to do just by the Northumberland Strait. throwing some money out there and ensuring that it is done. The Prince Edward Island link bridge must be tied into the environ- I am quite concerned about this matter. As the member for ment, the economy of the area, the needs of the community, and Davenport talked about earlier, the environment assessment those types of things. review process is something that must be taken extremely seriously as we look at all projects in the future. It is a process in The assessment of the environment is a very key and impor- which we have to develop some confidence, or the projects we tant part of whether or not this project should proceed. An have to deal with will constantly come under pressure from the independent agency, free from political pressure and influence public. Their ability to serve the interests of the public will be peddling, should be where the decisions are made. It should not held in jeopardy. be made by consultants who are paid by the proponent of a project to make the project appear to be environmentally friend- ly. Before closing I would like to put on record what I think must be involved in a good environmental assessment process. I simply want to indicate I do not think we are being well served There should also be a very broad definition of the environ- today to accept this constitutional amendment with so many ment applying universally to quite a variety of initiatives. The questions having been raised about the project, particularly on government has yet to proclaim the environmental assessment the environmental side. Members of all parties today have act. I am waiting very patiently for the Minister of the Environ- raised some of those concerns. None of them, other than the ment to bring a new environmental assessment act into the member for Davenport, have really expressed them in such a Chamber with the amendments suggested in the previous House way that we should not proceed with the project but should carry by the member for Davenport, members of the other parties, and on. myself dealing with these matters. The definition of environ- mental effect was expanded in the last bill to include health and socioeconomic conditions. We must ensure that kind of assess- Again I would like to quote former member Mr. Fulton who on ment is also done on projects similar to the fixed link. June 15 said:

Until Canadians are assured of what are the impacts of the bridge, if those impacts Environmental effect can also take into account physical and can be mitigated and if they can be mitigated what the costs are, we cannot start cultural heritage and current uses of lands and resources for seriously and intelligently addressing it. Instead what we are seeing is the traditional reasons by aboriginal people in Canada. The recent government shoving the project through the House, Prince Edward Island squeezing Supreme Court decision on the Oldman dam assists in strength- a constitutional amendment through, and SCI out there with its hand out. ening the definition of the environment to include the communi- ty’s livelihood. These are very important words to consider during the process of consideration of the constitutional amendment today. The environmental assessment process should also extend the policy and programs. When the Department of Public Works The ideal environmental assessment process in Canada has to wants to proceed with a project and undertakes to proceed with take into account many factors. Ideally the environmental it, the policy which guides it should assess the environmental assessment process should incorporate some of the following rules as well. This is something on which the previous govern- principles. I stressed once already that the assessment should be ment refused to budge. I am hoping that under the new legis-

1411

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Government Orders lation to be brought in by the new government the new minister Yet the one federal panel that looked at it in general terms will budge on this one and ensure that policies and programs are said: ‘‘Turn it down. Don’t accept it. Do something else’’. Many covered under the process. of the questions raised in the House today were of an environ- mental nature. They have still not been answered to the satisfac- The decision maker discretion should be minimized and tion of the people most concerned about it. A full and public accountability should be ensured. In the environmental assess- debate is important but it has to include all issues surrounding ment process and in building confidence among the public we the project. cannot be seen as having a strong environmental assessment process on the one hand and then later an unaccountable I feel very strongly about the environmental assessment decision making process which can ignore the whole exercise process and what it means for Canada. I also feel very strongly that has gone on before it. about the lack of an environmental assessment process on the Northumberland link project. I feel very unhappy the govern- ment has chosen not to move quickly on a new environmental New Democrat amendments in the previous Parliament to Bill assessment process. It would have avoided a lot of problems in C–13 went quite far to improve this and remove the tremendous dealing with the issue before us today. amount of discretion in the previous bill where the minister or responsible authorities were only bound to act when they were Madam Speaker, I thank you very much for your time and ‘‘of the opinion that damage to the environment might occur’’. attention today. I certainly wish all members well in their That discretion for the most part has now been removed and deliberations on this amendment. assessment or action must be taken if a project or undertaking may cause significant negative environmental effects. Hon. Audrey McLaughlin (Yukon): Madam Speaker, my colleague has raised a number of very pertinent questions on this This now has to be tested in court, but it goes a long way to issue. He has pointed out that the new Liberal government has closing a loophole under the guidelines which was used in the chosen simply to follow the policies of the previous Conserva- bridge project assessment and open to industry to influence tive government. I guess many Canadians will be asking: politicians. ‘‘What’s new?’’

Proponents should justify the purpose and the need of the He raised a very good point with regard to the environment. project. Alternatives should be considered as part of the assess- Much of the debate in Prince Edward Island on the fixed link ment process. What was never considered in this process was was linked to environmental issues. I know my colleague has improvement to the existing ferry system. There is an alterna- been very involved in studying these issues. Is it not now time, tive view to what could be taking place here: an injection of as part of the environmental process he described, to look at a funds and a maintenance of existing jobs. The assessment new form of what is often called green accounting? In other process that existed on this particular project did not take those words should we not look at projects in a way that takes into into account. A new environmental assessment bill should account other factors than cost, funding and financing? What ensure that we deal with this sort of thing. about the effects on health, the effects on the environment and other ancillary effects of any project undertaken that can result I also believe very strongly there should be a significant in additional costs to the public, if not well thought through? public role early and often throughout the process, including participant funding and notice. I will admit and agree there has What does my colleague think of the idea of a new form of been a lot of debate on Prince Edward Island about the Northum- accounting around major projects like this one? Does he support berland Strait and the bridge, and perhaps even the tunnel the that idea? member for Malpeque earlier indicated he originally supported. There is no question at all that the whole matter of public debate Mr. Taylor: Madam Speaker, I appreciate very much the over projects like this one is very important. The key thing in all question from the member for Yukon who has supported me in this is that the debate has hinged on economic issues, not on many of my efforts on environmental issues and for whom I environmental issues. know the environment is very important. Her comments about a green economy are not only important but most timely. I am very glad she raised them and I am very happy to have the (1810) opportunity to discuss them for a moment in the Chamber.

We have been forced to gloss over the environmental issues in For all too long we have talked about sustainable development the particular debate and not to make our decisions on environ- with the focus on the word development and not enough focus on mental issues but on economic ones because the government and sustainability of what it is that we are doing. There is nothing the proponents have constantly said: ‘‘Don’t worry about the more important in any government decision making than the environmental things. Our studies indicate that environmental concept of sustainability. If we are spending money on any matters are not important’’. project whatsoever, the long–term accountability of the project

1412

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Government Orders not only to the people but to the planet must be a very important I would have thought it would have been much more wise on part of our consideration. the part of the government if it is serious about green infrastruc- ture, and this is a point I make over and over again, to invest On the new idea of a green economy I attended a conference a money in rebuilding our rail system rather than allowing CN and few weeks ago in which the original discussion was around the CP to collaborate in ways to continue the dismantling and green industries and how we in Canada can develop the technol- downsizing of our rail system. That is the real green infrastruc- ogy, the skill and the ability to deal with the new green ture as far as I am concerned. industries in our country. Very soon the participants in that conference shifted from individual specific industries to the It pains me to hear talk about green infrastructure at the same entire economy. They began talking about a green economy in time as we allow projects such as this to go ahead and as we which decisions are made on the sustainability of our actions, allow our railways to deteriorate. the sustainability of our decision making. If we are serious about greenhouse gas emissions, if we are (1815) serious about putting less hydrocarbons into the air then we should be serious about reregulating our transportation system Development is not an infinite quantity. Development is so as to give a bias to rail. Right now there is a bias against rail. something that has a finite level to it. We have to be able to At the very least we could make it neutral. recognize that level and work within it. We have discovered that unfortunately on the Atlantic coast with our cod fishery. I would prefer a bias for rail because to me that would be a bias for the environment. The government has got to stop letting We are seeing it in the forests of northern Alberta, Saskatche- the railways react to the effects of deregulation. It has to start wan, British Columbia where we are not dealing with the saying that deregulation has not worked, let us reregulate. I do accountability of our decision–making on the sustainability of not care what you call it. The former Conservative Minister of our efforts. We work ourselves right out of the ability to Transport did not want to reregulate. He wanted to recalibrate. continue to work in that field. As parliamentarians we have to That is fine. I do not care whether it is called calibration, start considering green economies within our decision–making regulation, ostentation, you name it, as long as we get back to a process. system where we are creating more rail traffic and we are taking these trucks that look more and more like trains all the time off the road. There are trucks on the road that look more and more I had a chat this afternoon with the chair of the environment like trains all the time. They will probably want to go over this committee and I suggested that one of the studies the environ- causeway once it is built, just to get back to the motion. ment committee should be making is on the whole concept of greening our economy, about how to tie economic decision– making to long–term sustainability in the environment. The (1820) chair of the environment committee responded very positively to me in the context of the response to the environmental The time has come for us to build real green infrastructure. I conference in Rio where they did talk about the need for would love to hear the member for The Battlefords—Meadow revitalizing the global economy based on environmental deci- Lake comment on all of this. sion–making. There may be the opportunity to begin that discussion in Canada and actually carry it on into the economic Mr. Taylor: Madam Speaker, I only need a minute to tell the powers of the country and not just from the environmental part. hon. member that I agree entirely with everything he had to say. He put it very eloquently. I thank the hon. member for her question. It was most important and most timely. As a matter of fact I have a great bias toward rail myself. I want to pass on to the House an illustration of what the hon. Mr. (Winnipeg Transcona): Madam Speaker, I member is talking about. My mother–in–law has worked for a have a question for the hon. member for The Battlefords— trucking company for most of her life. She has stuck on her Meadow Lake but first of all I have a comment. fridge with nice little truck fridge magnets a cartoon of a train stopped at a railway crossing while a truck goes by pulling car One of the ironies, given the environmental dimensions of after car after car of product. The train had to stop to allow the this question, is that in the throne speech we heard from the trucks to go by. government about its intention to build a green infrastructure. I wonder whether this is what it had in mind when it was talking The government’s infrastructure program which talks about about green infrastructure. It is certainly not incontestable. In roads, sewer and water is good in the sense of what it is fact it is quite debatable and arguable whether this motion and covering. However there is not a single dollar going to rail out of the megaproject it will bring about is in fact green infrastruc- the government’s infrastructure program and I think that is a ture. tremendously sad oversight.

1413

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Adjournment Debate The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu): Is it the pleasure of the to what extent would the government introduce programs that House to adopt the motion? would encourage that to occur. Some hon. members: Agreed. What is it about the tax system that has upset people? What is Some hon. members: No. it about the tax system that has discouraged people who are hard working, who are running their businesses or going off to the The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu): All those in favour of mills or the mines, the farmers, the fishermen? It can be summed the motion will please say yea. up in the interpretation bulletin IT–518 from Revenue Canada. Some hon. members: Yea. This was sent recently to various businesses and individuals. It gives clues on all the things one can use as a tax deduction, The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu): All those opposed will legitimately to be fair, within the tax system, particularly when please say nay. it comes to entertainment. Some hon. members: Nay. For example, this is not an exhaustive list but entertainment The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu): In my opinion the yeas includes tickets for theatres, concerts, athletic events, or what- have it. ever the performance might be. Renting or leasing a private box And more than five members having risen: at the sports facility and buying champagne for friends is all tax deductible. Renting hotel rooms to have a party and entertain The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu): Call in the members. people is deductible. Buying liquor for a hospitality suite of (1825) course is tax deductible. Taking a cruise in the Caribbean, the South Pacific or to Greece is tax deductible. Taking friends to a [Translation] fashion show is also tax deductible. I guess people want to learn And the division bells having rung: how to dress more modernly and so on. SITTING SUSPENDED If you want to take your guest to a nightclub, Madam Speaker, or out to a hockey game, a football game, a baseball game or The Acting Speaker (Mr. Patry): At the request of the chief whatever; or if you want to take your friends fishing in northern government whip, the division is deferred until 6.30 p.m. Canada, northern Quebec, British Columbia or wherever; if you tomorrow. want to go hunting in northern Ontario, northern Saskatchewan (The sitting of the House was suspended at 6.26 p.m.) or northern Quebec, that is all tax deductible. Generally you can say: ‘‘Let us go on a three week vacation in Labrador and we will ______discuss business’’. Again that is tax deductible.

SITTING RESUMED I am not saying there is necessarily anything dastardly or The House resumed at 6.30 p.m. terribly sinister about this. However certain people can go fishing, hunting, camping, to the football game, or rent a room ______to entertain friends and it is done with the help of the tax system. The taxpayers generally pick up part of that tab. If one is deducting up to 80 per cent of those costs obviously then those ADJOURNMENT PROCEEDINGS who are at the hockey game watching the people up in the box drinking champagne or whatever, who have free tickets or only [English] pay 20 per cent of the price, are paying their way buying hot A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 dogs and so on. deemed to have been moved. (1835) SMALL BUSINESS In closing, after reading things like this bulletin from Reve- Mr. Nelson Riis (Kamloops): Madam Speaker, I am pleased nue Canada is it any wonder that people have become absolutely to participate in this debate on the underground economy and the disenchanted and disappointed with a tax system that can only recognition that Canadians generally have lost faith in our tax be described as unjust, unfair and biased. system. Somewhere between $60 billion and $100 billion in business transactions now take place beneath the surface in a Mr. Dennis J. Mills (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister way. of Industry): Madam Speaker, there are many things in the hon. My question to the minister the other day was whether or not member’s remarks that I happen to agree with. However I would the government was taking any definitive action to encourage like to begin by saying we know it was the GST in the last three those people who now want to move their operations above years that really exacerbated the underground economy not to ground and become legitimate players in the marketplace. Also mention the added paper burden for small business. Most

1414

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Adjournment Debate members would agree with that. It is also time to debunk the myth that the government must win every vote or resign. The failure of a government measure, We have taken a stand on this side of the House to eliminate even a spending initiative, does not automatically have to mean the GST. It was announced in the finance committee the other the defeat of the government. day that this study would begin right away. By the end of June we will have all the possible alternatives which will be much (1840) more fair, simple and efficient. The Prime Minister, the cabinet and the bureaucrats set policy Recently the government showed it was serious in going on and dictate the course of action with the usual assurances of: the offensive against the underground economy by taking on the ‘‘Don’t worry. We know what we are doing. We know what is tobacco issues. The changes in taxation were announced elimi- best’’. The time has come to give the electorate greater say in nating financial incentives that drove the significant subsector government. of the underground economy. Already there have been some For too long it has been politics first. Now it is time to put reports of reductions in the volume of tobacco being smuggled people first. How can we do this? We can loosen the chains. We into Canada which shows the effectiveness of that particular can allow for free votes in the House of Commons. If for policy. example a vote on a budget measure or motion was negative, it could be sent back to committee and improved before coming The Department of Finance is working closely with Revenue again to the House. If the government loses the non–confidence Canada looking for ways to streamline and simplify the system. motion that follows that motion, then it would have to resign and call a general election. The people of Canada want more direct I also want to say we have to be careful when we loosely throw democracy and I would encourage the Prime Minister to comply around some of these tax deductions as being special privileges with their wishes. for the wealthy. I share the member’s view with the Skydome box holders. However, with respect to tourism and fishing trips The Constitution provides for this. All the Prime Minister these measures were put in to aid small business tourism needs to do is rise in his place and declare that the government operators. If all of a sudden we were to eliminate all of those will not consider the defeat of a government motion including a things it would cause significant unemployment. We have to be spending measure to constitute an expression of non–confidence very careful in how we address those particular deductions. I in the government unless it is immediately followed by a formal know the member would not want to see an adverse condition non–confidence motion. because of a reckless tax preference cut in our tax act that would affect an industry which he too is so proud of. Ms. (Parliamentary Secretary to Prime Minister): Madam Speaker, on February 2, 1994 the member I want to acknowledge that we recognize there are some for Wetaskiwin questioned the Prime Minister on the issue of serious flaws in the tax act of Canada. We take all of the free votes. member’s specific points today and hope to address them in the near future. The hon. member should realize that this government has done more to champion the cause of House of Commons reform in the first 100 days of its mandate than the previous government HOUSE OF COMMONS did in nine long years.

Mr. Dale Johnston (Wetaskiwin): Madam Speaker, my topic On Monday, February 7, the government House leader placed is really quite timely given the fact that we expected a vote a few before this House a framework for renewal. This framework minutes ago and suddenly it was put off. addressed a wide range of issues this government believes will reinstate the trust and respect that Canadians want to have in The other day I asked the Prime Minister when he would their institutions. announce to the House that the government would not consider On the subject of free votes it must be noted that this is not a the defeat of a government motion including a spending measure matter dealt with now by the standing orders of the House. to constitute the expression of non–confidence in the govern- Instead it is a matter to be dealt with by each party and each ment unless it is immediately followed by a formal motion of party’s members themselves. non–confidence. This is why the hon. member will note that in part VII of the It is time to release the members of Parliament from the iron government House leader’s motion there is a reference to the cage of party discipline in this country. I think that the House of Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs to ex- Commons is probably one of the most regimented parliamentary amine free votes in the House of Commons and other important systems in the world. We must not forget that we were sent here matters. by the people of Canada. We were sent here to represent the views of the people of this great nation, not the wills of the Therefore I ask the hon. member and his party to fully political parties. participate in this process. I am sure he agrees with me when I

1415

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Adjournment Debate say that the task ahead is to reinforce the fundamentals of the for on a number of occasions. Indeed today I met with Daniel system and restore a more active role for all members of Ashini and Elizabeth Penashue from the Innu nation who talked Parliament. about the devastating impact of these tests over their lands.

CRUISE MISSILE TESTING Let us support the World Court project. The World Court project is a very important project in which Canada is being Mr. Svend J. Robinson (Burnaby—Kingsway): Madam called on to join in submitting a legal brief to the International Speaker, on January 20, 1994 I raised a question in the House Court of Justice making the use of nuclear weapons illegal under with respect to the government’s upcoming decision on the international law. testing of cruise missiles in Canada. Those are the kinds of alternatives that the government could This question dealt both with the substance of the tests as well have had. Those are the kinds of alternatives that would have as the credibility of the government and the promises it made meant that we had a truly independent foreign policy. In fact when in opposition. Although the Liberal government of 1983 retired U.S. Admiral Eugene Carroll, one of the most respected had signed the first testing agreement, in opposition it took a commentators on this question, said that any decision by the very different position. Liberal government to end the testing would be viewed as ‘‘an The written commitment that was made during the last federal assertion of Canada’s independence’’ and have no negative election stated it would bring this testing program to an end. It ramifications. went on to speak about the importance of public hearings that That is what we thought the Liberals were promising in would involve northerners, peace groups, aboriginal peoples opposition. That is what they talked about in their red book. and others. Certainly that is not what they deliver. What happened? There were no parliamentary hearings. In fact there was only one northern member of Parliament who Let us hope these tests will be the last tests and that Canada spoke in the debate, the hon. member for Nunatsiaq. He spoke will have an independent foreign policy based on peace and very eloquently against the testing of cruise missiles. He indi- preservation of the environment and a respect for aboriginal cated that he was also speaking on behalf of his colleague, the peoples and northerners. member for Western Arctic. Mr. (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of I know my colleague from the Yukon has spoken eloquently National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs): Mr. on many occasions both in this House and outside on behalf of Speaker, when I was in opposition and asked questions of the her constituents in the Yukon against the testing of cruise government I never got any answers. I can tell the hon. member missiles. Of course the Reform Party was ready. It supported the that he is going to get an answer. In fact he has answered his own testing of cruise missiles. question so I really could sit down now. [Translation] However, I will say that in 1993, two months before the election took place, the hon. member would know that the I must admit that I was really shocked and disappointed by the previous government authorized these tests. They were due to Bloc’s position on this issue. At the same time, I was not overly take place on January 25, 1994. After this government came to surprised because Mr. Bouchard had gone to Washington to power and while in opposition we promised a parliamentary reassure the Americans that an independent Quebec would debate on this subject. remain a faithful and loyal ally, that there would be no change in Canadian policy, that the policy would remain obedient to the Mr. Robinson: Public hearings. United States. Mr. Mifflin: We promised a debate on this subject. When the (1845) government was formed we had a debate on it in a reasonable time, on January 26 as a matter of fact. Twenty–nine members The sad thing is that today, just two hours ago, I have heard a participated in the debate and 30 or so participated in question member of the Bloc Quebecois say: ‘‘Now, the Bloc is thinking and comment. as a block’’. If that is the case, it is sad indeed. I have to tell members that the preponderance of the debate [English] and the comment was in favour of testing. As a result, the Quite clearly there is no legal obligation whatsoever to government made the decision and on February 3 announced conduct these tests. In fact the minister himself said it was a that the test would be authorized to continue. We expect they courtesy that he was extending to the United States. I suggest will be done this month. there was an alternative. The alternative was to say no. There is a At the same time, the government made it clear to the United foreign policy review. There is a defence review. States government that it should not presuppose any outcome of Let us look at strengthening multilateral institutions. Let us the parliamentary debate and the public hearings on both the look at working toward peace. Let us look at ending the tests of defence policy and the foreign policy which will address, and low level flights over Innu lands as some Liberals have called the hon. member is right, the very strong feelings still in this

1416

February 15, 1994 COMMONS DEBATES

Adjournment Debate country on testing. This is one of the subjects that will be institutional and public sectors to finally turn the information addressed. highway into a reality?

I remind the hon. member that as the quarterback parliamen- I would like to give him a warning, Madam Speaker, since this tary secretary for this debate I promised to get him on about 7.30 electronic highway could also become a very effective instru- and in fact he got on at 7.43. I am sure he appreciated the ment of centralization through its impact on education and co–operation and the credibility of the government. training. I hope that we can rely on the parliamentary secretary to speak [Translation] on behalf of the minister and promise this House on his honour that, in building the electronic highway, the government will ELECTRONIC HIGHWAY respect areas of provincial jurisdiction and ensure that commu- nications linking us to Internet are also in French. I know that is one of his concerns. Having said that, I will now let him have the Mr. Réal Ménard (Hochelaga—Maisonneuve): Madam floor. Speaker, I would have liked the Minister of Industry to be with us. I am sure his parliamentary secretary is very competent, but I [English] would have liked him to be present since I asked him a question on the electronic highway on February 4 and the minister was Mr. Dennis J. Mills (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister rather evasive and tight–lipped on this issue. The population is of Industry): Madam Speaker, let me begin by saying to the rather concerned about this, as we do not really know where the hon. member that I can assure him that the Minister of Industry government is going. We are under the impression that the does not have his foot on the brakes on this particular issue. In Minister of Industry is not really in on it and that he has his foot fact, it is quite the reverse. He has the pedal right to the metal, as on the brakes. they say, and we are going full bore on this particular issue of the electronic highway.

(1850) I want to remind the House that, first of all, it was announced in the speech from the throne that we were going to develop a The information highway is a very important issue, for it is a strategy for Canada’s information highway. On February 2 the great adventure that could link all Canadians with national and secretary of state for science and technology committed the international networks that could give us access to hospital and federal government to a number of objectives and principles to school data banks and to all kinds of information. guide and develop the approach. We talked about the advisory council because it is a very It is an important issue that needs to be debated. I would have important issue. It is a complex issue and we wanted to make liked to ask the minister because whenever we ask him about it sure that the council would have a broad range of groups and in the House, we get the impression that he leaves everything to organizations that would help formulate Canada’s strategy in the private sector and that he does not intend to spend govern- this particular area. Also, we want to make sure that there is ment funds on this. representation from not just industry but from labour, education and consumers. When we look at what is happening in the United States, we can see that if Canada, which has a very good track record in the The council, which is in the process of being put together right technology, communications and telecommunications sectors, now, will be announced very soon. This council will provide is to enter the information highway, the minister should give advice to the government and it is going to be active on line. I clear indications and invest money. can tell the member that this government is putting incredible resources behind the information highway, the electronic high- I was concerned to hear that he wanted to set up an advisory way. committee. My concern is that this issue was examined last year by another committee chaired by Mr. Ostry, the president of TV I can speak about our own case in which we are beginning to Ontario, who tabled a report outlining very clearly the legisla- put information out. In the Toronto region we are doing some tive and regulatory measures the government must take to build testing which will go into other regions. We are looking at ideas this electronic highway. for community access centres. Let me reassure the member that this government is committed in a very serious way and will be I am wondering if the minister, who is acting a little slowly on moving very fast. We welcome his input. this issue, is not trying to divert our attention by striking a new (1855) advisory committee whose mandate is still unclear. I hope that the parliamentary secretary will be able to tell us exactly what HEALTH CARE this committee is supposed to do. What are the government’s intentions? Will public funds be made available? Will he be able Hon. Audrey McLaughlin (Yukon): Madam Speaker, I rise to gather around the same table representatives of the private, on a question that I asked the Minister of Health on February 10,

1417

COMMONS DEBATES February 15, 1994

Adjournment Debate 1994 on health care and on her position on the reduction of taxes Ms. (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of on alcohol products which the Distillers Association of Canada Health): Madam Speaker, the question as the hon. member has the day after the reduction of taxes on cigarettes began to said is a very complex one and to try to boil it down to a advocate for. simplistic answer is impossible. The response to that question was in effect no comment. The I will take on the issue first and foremost of the problem of response of the Minister of Health to the reduction of taxes on tobacco smuggling. When the Prime Minister stood up in this cigarettes was in effect no comment. The reaction of the House on February 8 and announced his national action plan on Minister of Health to the proposed federal idea of taxing the tobacco he said very clearly that smuggling is threatening the health benefits of employees was in effect no comment. safety of our communities and the livelihood of law–abiding merchants. The problem of tobacco smuggling is an increasing- This is not good enough for the future of health care in this ly complex one because it touches on the very fabric of our country. Within the next two years we will be undertaking a very Canadian identity which is dedicated to peace, order and good comprehensive discussion right across the country on the future government. It touches on the safety of our communities. It of the health care system. It seems to me that the Minister of touches on respect for law and order. It also affected the Health by refusing to take a stand, including a response to my economy and, as the hon. member mentioned before, the health question on her position on the reduction of taxes on alcohol, is of Canadians. not being an advocate for health care in this country. Organized crime networks have been responsible for 95 per The lowering of federal tax on cigarette products clearly is cent of the tobacco smuggling that was going on in Canada. going to be a major cost to the economy. The estimates are that They were also responsible for smuggling liquor, drugs and over some $300 million a year will be added to the federal firearms at the same time. Tobacco and alcohol were controlled deficit as a result of this and this does not account for revenues drugs as were firearms. We would have lost control over these that will be lost by provinces and territories if they too reduce controlled substances if we had not done something immediate- and follow that lead. ly to deal with that smuggling and to deal with the smuggling of liquor. Clearly, when people are concerned about the debt and deficit in this country this rather odd move by the government in an ad In order to deal with the matter the government took unprece- hoc policy attempting to resolve what is clearly a very difficult dented action. I want to remind the hon. member that the issue is problem, that of smuggling, has created many others. We simply not a new one. It has been going on for years. The past do not have a Minister of Health prepared to stand up and be government tended to ignore it and to pretend it did not occur. clear about her philosophy about health care in this country. We took immediate unprecedented action. We increased the number of RCMP and customs officials dedicated to fighting We see by the most conservative estimates that the true cost of tobacco smuggling. They are using new strategies. They are tobacco related illnesses to the health care system in this accompanying these resources with other strategies to crack country is about $9.6 billion a year with indirect costs being down and to keep surveillance on smugglers starting immediate- some $15 billion a year. Clearly, the refusal of the minister to ly. take a position on these issues jeopardizes the health care system in this country. The hon. member talked about the lack of a response from the Minister of Health on this matter. The Minister of Health is There have been many comments on this issue. There are responsible and has worked very hard for the major health many points of view on this issue. Surely Canadians can expect a strategy found here. We have invested about $185 million in minister of health to stand up for the health of Canadians and to funds from taxing the tobacco industry. They will be dedicated be that strong advocate. to prevention and promotion. We have already seen the launch of a media campaign aimed at kids, the proclamation of the I want to assure all Canadians that the New Democratic Party Tobacco Sales to Young Persons Act, and legislation to elimi- will continue to be a strong advocate for a strong health care nate kiddie packs, to increase the age and to crack down on sale system in this country that meets the needs of all Canadians. to minors. The minister has responded. One commentator, Dalton Camp, commented that this policy The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu): I am sorry but the time clearly was joining the Reform Party too soon. for the member’s response has expired. My question to the parliamentary secretary is simply is it the It being 7 p.m., the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at government’s intention to reimburse provinces and territories 2 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1). for lost revenues with this policy of reducing taxes on cigarettes and potentially on alcohol products? (The House adjourned at 7 p.m.)

1418

TABLE OF CONTENTS Tuesday, February 15, 1994

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS

Business Corporations Act

Bill C–12. Motions for introduction and first reading deemed adopted...... 1343

Mr. Anderson ...... 1343

Questions on the Order Paper ...... 1343.

Mr. Milliken ...... 1343

GOVERNMENT ORDERS

Prince Edward Island Fixed Link

Mr. Dingwall ...... 1343

Motion ...... 1343

Mr. Bouchard ...... 1347

Mr. Harper (Calgary West) ...... 1349.

Mr. MacAulay ...... 1352

Mr. Lebel ...... 1353

Mrs. Brushett ...... 1354

Mr. Robichaud ...... 1354

Mrs. Brushett ...... 1355

Mr. Nunez ...... 1355

Mr. Gauthier (Roberval) ...... 1356.

Mr. Anderson ...... 1358

Mrs. Stewart (Brant) ...... 1359.

Mr. Lavigne (Verdun—Saint–Paul) ...... 1359.

Mr. McGuire ...... 1360

Mr. Dubé ...... 1361

Mr. Taylor ...... 1362

Ms. Clancy ...... 1362

Ms. Skoke ...... 1364

Mr. Strahl ...... 1364

Mr. Dingwall ...... 1367

Mr. O’Brien ...... 1369

Mr. Sauvageau ...... 1370

Mr. Lavigne (Verdun—Saint–Paul) ...... 1371.

Mr. Guimond ...... 1372

Mr. Duhamel ...... 1374

STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS

Teaching Excellence in Science, Technology and Mathematics

Mr. McCormick ...... 1375

Quebec Sovereignty

Mr. Leroux (Shefford) ...... 1376

Recall Legislation

Mr. White (Fraser Valley West) ...... 1376

Teaching Excellence in Science, Technology and Mathematics

Ms. Torsney ...... 1376

Academy Awards

Mr. Cannis ...... 1376

Multicultural Week

Mrs. Terrana ...... 1376

Bishop Willy Romélus

Mr. Pomerleau ...... 1377

Michelle Morton

Mrs. Brown (Calgary Southeast) ...... 1377

Canada Scholarships

Mr. Cauchon ...... 1377

Job Training

Mr. Valeri ...... 1377

Olympic Winter Games

Mr. Flis ...... 1378

Chili

Mr. Nunez ...... 1378

The Economy

Mr. White (North Vancouver) ...... 1378

Teaching Excellence in Science, Technology and Mathematics

Mr. Jackson ...... 1378

Winter Olympics

Ms. Guarnieri ...... 1378

ORAL QUESTION PERIOD

Organized Crime

Mr. Bouchard ...... 1379

Mr. Gray ...... 1379

Mr. Bouchard ...... 1379

Mr. Gray ...... 1379

Mr. Bouchard ...... 1379

Mr. Gray ...... 1379

Mr. Gauthier (Roberval) ...... 1380.

Mr. Gray ...... 1380

Mr. Gauthier (Roberval) ...... 1380.

Mr. Gray ...... 1380

Government Expenditures

Mr. Manning ...... 1380

Mr. Chrétien (Saint–Maurice) ...... 1380.

Mr. Manning ...... 1380

Mr. Chrétien (Saint–Maurice) ...... 1380.

Mr. Manning ...... 1380

Mr. Eggleton ...... 1381

Euthanasia

Mrs. Venne ...... 1381

Mr. Rock ...... 1381

Mrs. Venne ...... 1381

Mr. Rock ...... 1381

Government Expenditures

Mr. Penson ...... 1381

Mr. Collenette ...... 1381

Mr. Penson ...... 1381

Mr. Collenette ...... 1382

Tainted Blood

Mrs. Picard ...... 1382

Ms. Marleau ...... 1382

Mrs. Picard ...... 1382

Ms. Marleau ...... 1382

Job Training

Mr. Solberg ...... 1382

Mr. Axworthy (Winnipeg South Centre) ...... 1382.

Mr. Solberg ...... 1382

Mr. Axworthy (Winnipeg South Centre) ...... 1382.

Tainted Blood

Mr. de Savoye ...... 1382

Ms. Marleau ...... 1383

Mr. de Savoye ...... 1383

Ms. Marleau ...... 1383

The Environment

Mr. Caccia ...... 1383

Ms. McLellan ...... 1383

The Budget

Mr. Grubel ...... 1383

Mr. Peters ...... 1383

Mr. Grubel ...... 1383

Mr. Peters ...... 1384

Social Assistance

Mrs. Lalonde ...... 1384

Mr. Axworthy (Winnipeg South Centre) ...... 1384.

Mrs. Lalonde ...... 1384

Mr. Axworthy (Winnipeg South Centre) ...... 1384.

Unemployment Insurance

Mr. Breitkreuz (Yorkton—Melville) ...... 1384

Mr. Peters ...... 1384

Mr. Breitkreuz (Yorkton—Melville) ...... 1384.

Mr. Axworthy (Winnipeg South Centre) ...... 1384.

Immigration

Mr. Alcock ...... 1384

Mr. Marchi ...... 1385

International Trade

Mr. Loubier ...... 1385

Mr. MacLaren ...... 1385

Mr. Loubier ...... 1385

Mr. MacLaren ...... 1385

Museum of Industrial History

Mr. White (Fraser Valley West) ...... 1385

Mr. Ouellet ...... 1385

Mr. White (Fraser Valley West) ...... 1386.

Mr. Ouellet ...... 1386

Canadian Exports

Mr. Rocheleau ...... 1386

Mr. MacLaren ...... 1386

Public Service of Canada

Mr. Strahl ...... 1386

Mr. Eggleton ...... 1386

Pearson International Airport

Mr. Volpe ...... 1386

Mr. Young ...... 1386

Presence in Gallery

The Speaker ...... 1387

Privilege

Member for Markham—Whitchurch—Stouffville

Mr. Bhaduria ...... 1387

The Speaker ...... 1388

The Late Irénée Pelletier

Mr. Charest ...... 1388

Mr. Chrétien (Saint–Maurice) ...... 1388.

Mr. Berger ...... 1389

Mr. Leroux (Shefford) ...... 1389.

Mr. Riis ...... 1389

Mr. Lincoln ...... 1389

GOVERNMENT ORDERS

Prince Edward Island Fixed Link

Consideration resumed of motion ...... 1390

Mr. Proud ...... 1390

Mr. Langlois ...... 1391

Mr. Duhamel ...... 1392

Mr. Taylor ...... 1394

Mr. Morrison ...... 1394

Mr. Bodnar ...... 1395

Mr. Duhamel ...... 1395

Mr. Easter ...... 1396

Mr. Hart ...... 1396

Mr. Duhamel ...... 1397

Mr. Rideout ...... 1398

Mr. Hill (Prince George—Peace River) ...... 1398.

Mr. Langlois ...... 1399

Mr. Easter ...... 1399

Mr. Morrison ...... 1400

Mr. Rock ...... 1401

Mr. Fillion ...... 1401

Mr. Serré ...... 1403

Mr. Ménard ...... 1404

Mr. Fillion ...... 1404

Business of the House

Mr. Robichaud ...... 1404

Prince Edward Island Fixed Link

Consideration resumed of motion ...... 1404

Mr. Caccia ...... 1404

Mr. Lebel ...... 1405

Mr. Laurin ...... 1406

Mr. English ...... 1406

Mr. Hoeppner ...... 1407

Mr. Morrison ...... 1407

Mr. Hermanson ...... 1408.

Mr. Taylor ...... 1409

Ms. McLaughlin ...... 1412.

Mr. Blaikie ...... 1413

Sitting suspended

(At 6.26 p.m. the sitting of the House was suspended.) ...... 1414.

Sitting Resumed

The House resumed at 6.30 p.m...... 1414.

ADJOURNMENT PROCEEDINGS

Small Business

Mr. Riis ...... 1414

Mr. Mills (Broadview—Greenwood) ...... 1414.

House of Commons

Mr. Johnston ...... 1415

Ms. Augustine ...... 1415

Cruise Missile Testing

Mr. Robinson ...... 1416

Mr. Mifflin ...... 1416

Electronic Highway

Mr. Ménard ...... 1417

Mr. Mills (Broadview—Greenwood) ...... 1417.

Health Care

Ms. McLaughlin ...... 1417.

Ms. Fry ...... 1418